AlotOfReading

If your CEO is going around talking about how your product will "most likely lead to the end of the world", people are right to expect you to be pretty careful in what you're doing. OpenAI allowed bidirectional communication across security domains for over a month before discovery. Even after it was discovered (and not completely fixed), they didn't set up monitoring able to detect attacks against internal or external services, which went on for further weeks.

Isolation is a pretty standard requirement for lots of networks, especially gov. AWS provides isolation domains, and used to have a unidirectional cross-domain service called AWS diode. Or you can just configure your gateways properly / buy data diodes. Lots of possible solutions.

Probably one of the numerous companies making qualified receivers? E.g. [0]. There's even a published table comparing basically all of them [1].

[0] https://www.aac-clyde.space/what-we-do/space-products-compon...

[1] https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/23/17/7648#app1-sensors-23-07...

It's entirely possible they're using something like block floating point, where most of the hardware is simply fixed point. AMD's NPU does this, for example.

Another year or two of RAM shortages should go a long way to closing that gap.

Even if that's the case, max_user_watches is never less than 8k unless you've set it lower for some reason. If the editor is prioritizing currently open files as it should, there should basically never be a problem even if project sync suffers.

Seems to be a good indicator of ideology and political alignment.

Not exactly a strong argument if you need like 5 qualifications to demonstrate the issue. If the right node fails, if it happens right as you walk up, if it's raining, if your porch is uncovered, if your door doesn't have an immediate fallback... I'm sure someone will be affected because of the law of large numbers, but it seems like an unlikely scenario to base a purchasing decision on.

I'm forced to have a relationship with a bank that sends out iPad giveaway emails, where your chance of winning is contingent on filling out a survey with personal information. These occasionally go out on the same day as their periodic "how to recognize scams" newsletter.

Do you have any hard numbers from your community on how many cases had flock as crucial to resolving the case?

When my community banned them, the police were only able to offer a single vehicle theft case as positive evidence, but the data was being sent to police stations and locally unpopular federal agencies clear across the country. We could have spent the municipal budget on giving the victims a new car with far fewer privacy concerns and still saved money.

    I'm building an EMR and there is a large portion that is CRUD, but that doesn't mean I don't rely on enormous forms or don't need client-side validation.

Another way to interpret the parent is that the site should degrade gracefully in the absence of client side scripting. Client-side input validation is valuable for an EMR, but best practice when I was involved in that field a decade ago was to avoid free form input entirely to minimize input errors.

My personal suspicion is that most providers would ultimately prefer a well-designed TUI from 1995 to a fancy SPA that stops working whenever the Wi-Fi is slow (i.e. most days).

How long did it take you to review things for correctness? Like an incremental query engine is a few thousand lines of reasonably difficult code on its own, a reliable WAL is another few thousand, etc, and each of those might take me days or weeks of thinking to have any serious confidence in them. I guess you can get provenance and ACL tracking "for free" from a query engine, but it still seems like a very ambitious project.

That would explain why mine is increasingly lagging as it ages. Unfortunately, the libra H2O went with eMMC for water resistance, so replacement is slightly more involved.

I apologize for such a big program — I didn't have enough tokens to write a small one.

- my coworkers

Like all advice, A.B.A. some pretty serious flaws if you apply it too universally. Automated solutions tend not to replacing manual work perfectly or completely. They do most of the same things, and the distinction tends to be forgotten. Maybe a human goes in and fixes things for a bit afterward, but that doesn't last. Eventually the accessible 90% is declared good enough and people forget that the rest is even possible.

The first case of large scale automation demonstrates this very well. Medieval manuscripts looked like this [0]. You can see the imperfections, but it's still a beautiful book. Gutenberg bibles omitted the scribe in favor of automated printing, but humans remained involved with the creative details in illumination and rubrication. The result is genuinely beautiful [1]. The works that were printed a century later rarely featured this kind of post-print human involvement [2]. This is still better than most of what's printed today, but it's a clear step down.

Now, there's a reasonable argument to be made that the quality differences don't matter for books and certainly don't outweigh the cost advantages. But imagine someone at your passport office has taken A.B.A. to heart and automated 90% of the job. Over time, the organization will stop handling all the edge cases and. But the edge cases didn't stop happening, they're just no longer visible. Beyond a certain scale (e.g. Google and other FAANGs), those inevitable failures manifest as seemingly capricious behavior that makes everyone hate your system and produces outcomes no human involved actually wants.

[0] https://i0.wp.com/blogs.princeton.edu/notabilia/wp-content/u...

[1] https://ff-65a4.kxcdn.com/assets/uploads/OriginalDocs_old/98...

[2] https://www.prepressure.com/images/Nieuwe-Tijdinghe-newspape...

I get what you're saying, but my opinion is that an argument that encompasses everything from local operations up the highest levels of international leadership is an argument about the entire organization.

I don't know why you're telling me this. It's not like I agree with the article. I'm offering it as an example of people who think DWB is political.

Quads make it feasible to write correctly rounded double functions. You can almost do the same things with double-double, but the result is slower and implementing most of the standard functions remains a bit of an open problem.

I'm not sure how you can read the article and think it isn't arguing MSF/DWB is political. A few quotes:

    Hamas operatives in Gaza hospitals, failure to screen out terrorists, and politicized leadership erode the Nobel Prize-winning aid group’s claim to neutrality

    While continuing to invoke the language of medical neutrality, its rhetoric has become overtly politicized, most notably in its discourse on Israel.

    From medical neutrality to political advocacy

    This ideological position has also been reinforced at the highest level of MSF’s international leadership.

    That silence leaves the international community to ask whether MSF is advocating for Palestinians or functioning as a humanitarian façade through which terror is laundered by the moral authority of humanitarian medicine.

Unfortunately, there are actually people who believe that DWB's purpose is political. Here's an example from the Times of Israel [0].

[0] https://www.timesofisrael.com/doctors-without-borders-and-th...

I'd almost rather Google scholar not offer that, because it might draw attention from the eye of sauron and deliver them to the Google graveyard.

Of all the evils normally associated with visual programming languages, enabling cybercrime isn't one I've previously considered. Now that I've seen it, I'm surprised it wasn't more common before LLMs appeared.

You missed the point of the example. The parent said any design that has to change with a single requirement shift is a bad design. So I gave a requirement that virtually any design would have to change to accommodate. It doesn't preclude the existence of other, more plausible requirements that shift designs. I even provided a real example of one, which you've ignored.

It's extreme to demonstrate the point, but it's not contrived. Realtime deadlines are a completely normal requirement for the systems I work on. I have change reqs on my desk right now that specify a full reboot back to network responsiveness in <=300ms. That definitely changes how the system is designed.

Then I guess no design is good. Here's an easy example: take any software system you can think of. Let's add a single new requirement: it must produce an output in 1us. I'll bet your system has to change.

Taken directly from ssa.gov:

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/central.html

I suspect the difference is that "full-time wage and salary workers" is a much smaller group than "all workers". I admit that I used the word salary in the original post though.

The median salary in the US is $43k for the latest year I see data (2023). Median salary in the Netherlands and Germany was €44-48k or ~$50-55k.

We might make half as much (rather less for me actually) because of our specific industry, but that's not generally true.

Care to venture some opinions on how "we" could actually prosecute criminals running scam farms in Myanmar? There's always going to be another criminal, and many of them deliberately operate outside the reach of western law.

For what it's worth, I wasn't demanding anything. I was solely pointing out that the platforms aren't neutral here. They're active participants in perpetuating these scams.

The platform:

1. Takes money from the scammer

2. Tells the scammer how to target people

3. Serves the scam to the consumer, ensuring they see it

4. Takes a cut of the action when the scam is successful

5. Tells the scammer how to optimize their campaign

6. Continues working with scammers after they're reported

The scammer has a fairly small part in the overall operation. The platform is doing almost all of the actual work perpetrating the scam. They're not remotely innocent here.

I haven't used sim daltonism, but most of these simulators assume your opsins are fully non-functional. You usually have multiple copies of the relevant genes and most of them need to be non-functional for complete colorblindness. Most people are only partially colorblind as a result, from what I understand.

Additionally, mutations can shift your spectral sensitivity curves away from "human normal", which further affects color perception.