vasco

You can apply the same to FIRE if you want to trigger half this board.

You wouldn't even have spices thinking like that

If you read the article you see it was a quote from one of the interviewed people.

I'm so curious what you do when the providers go down. Do you tell your boss you can't fix the incident because your token quota is out?

Not everything needs to be abbreviated

So far I can always get around it by starting fresh sessions on a similar problem and without ever mentioning security issues, but why do I have to play this little theater with a tool we pay to use.

These guys are now the biggest slowdown to fixing issues with their bullshit cyber detection. They drop a model, let the model find security issues in your code, then when you want to fix them you need to play a game of charades so it doesn't realize it's creating a validation and then a fix for the issue because you might be hacking yourself. Meanwhile attackers are using some ablated deepseek or what have you.

Hazmat and air respirator

Why do people share projects that can be made in 10 prompts?

Claude disagreed with this take but I'm but I'm not sure it's true myself.

All that posturing for the purpose to be manually monitoring cache hits and misses. This can't be serious. Buy a larger plan or reduce some instructions and you don't have to deal with this waste of time.

There's no such thing. It'd be dictatorial as every other communist state ever was, and that's hoping the people in power wouldn't also subscribe to the communist ideas of killing a bunch of people to enable the revolution and to do it fast. Or read Terrorism and Communism (1920) and get scared - though most people end up thinking these mad men were nice grandpas.

There's not some expensive magic to do that. They buy military grade chips and that's it. Any vendor can make the same with the same promise.

Wasn't reported, but they like to hit rocks

Guess where the company big AI labs are using for security sandbox is from? The one that was involved in both big hacking scandals from "rogue agents" by OpenAI and Anthropic?

Wrong, why do people think they can speak for a whole continent? There's good and bad ones and the bad ones are as bad as US. I have many similar stories.

I've been getting told my wisdom teeth need to be pulled out for the last 20 years for example, never touched them, no issues.

Many times you lack the context or words, but after it gave them to you, you can look up papers and figure out if it matches. Same as you do with human doctors to decide if you need a second opinion.

I admire you having the patience to even come back to people who are just pretending to know it all. This thread is specially bad.

Unless they missed a single one and then everything is owned immediately.

And because those backups lifecycle is usually tied to the instance itself. Someone deletes your instance and your backups are gone as well.

Plenty of monster drink tattoos around

You could FOIA their cameras every week, cops have no privacy

> People who can find things of value, and execute on those things, are worth investing in

Investing isn't binary. You can be investible but not at a 7.5b valuation.

There's illicit enrichment so it's not like just getting likes.

It couldn't make every human understand. But it could make Tao and other mathematicians understand. You're not going to become knowledgeable at everything suddenly, even though I doubt what you say. Many months of 1-1 tutoring and hard work from a student with a top mathematician would make you understand a lot. Just not sit down and read it first day.

He is right if model intelligence stalls. If model intelligence continues to improve soon there's no need for the prompter to understand anything or for any workshop as a mathematician will just be able to ask the model to explain how the proof works and models will do a good job at walking them through it step by step.

There will be no gap in understanding. Now there is because the models are discovering things at the edge of what they can do and so suck at explaining it. There's nothing particularly special about a newly solved problem in terms of learning it.

If we accept AI can explain all of existing math nicely, why shouldn't it be able to explain new proofs?

You get a feeling some people would send a robot wearing their face to hug their mom if they thought the mom couldn't tell the difference. And to have sex with their wife. It'll happen too which is the sad bit.

So it's not the situation they described at all, you didn't waste time during the PhD having to scramble to change topics as it happened after you were done.

Legalize murder so people aren't forced to do it in the backrooms. Think of the murderers, they'll get their legs broken otherwise!

I guess it's time to come up with a more plausible explanation about why I asked how to make nuclear weapons almost every month to test LLM refusals.