Drakim

That seems like a somewhat ridiculous objection. Should everybody start owning their own private planes to avoid people with BO at airplanes?

I don't know about a full on conspiracy, but it's no secret that in the US they put a lot of additional sugar into products you wouldn't think had them.

Zelda 1 has TONS of built-in compression, and it's own decompression routines.

That's not a very compelling counterexample, when you consider how often countries with governments force other countries with government to do as they want, often with nothing but economic or soft power.

Buying an entire cart full of groceries that will last for weeks is a somewhat American cultural thing. I'm not saying that I've never seen it, but the norm where I live in Europe is to have one of those hand-held baskets and getting enough for 2-3 days tops.

It does not, I've also used Dexie.js. Your usecase has most likely been too small to run into the very annoying walls.

I was shocked to discover how incredibly poorly IndexedDB works. I always thought it would be fast and snappy if a bit alien. But nope, it's incredibly bad!

Despite being a native feature to the browser it's incredibly slow, and the way it works in terms of fetching records based on non-primary keys forces you to either load your entire dataset into RAM at once or iterate though it record-by-record in a slow callback. Something as trivial as 10k records can bring your webapp to a crawl.

Language is powerful.

Language can do poker, trading, and other intelligent activities.

So there would be money, it would just be less efficient. That's a fair enough claim, but I don't understand why I was downvoted for asking.

Why would there be no money under socialism?

Emulators are wonderful, I got into assembly for the 6502 processor used in the NES (Nintendo Entertainment System) and it's been an absolute blast, there is something so inherently satisfying and almost zen-like in it.

A big difference is that you can't put a robot in jail. Even though the person driving the car is usually not harmed by hitting somebody on foot, it's still a life-or-death level situation, they might be looking at multiple years in prison, a large portion of their life gone.

The same even stakes are not there with robots killing humans. For one side it's a life-or-death situation, while for the other side it's profit margins and numbers. Companies are usually very happy to increase yearly profit for something as minor as a decimal percentage rise in human deaths spread across society, that's not even controversial.

Heck, not only can you not put a robot in jail, you can't even stop it from driving the next day as if nothing happened because it's duplicate running the exact same software and hardware is all over society.

I still think robot cars is a good thing though, because they will have a lot less accidents than us humans who love to drink and drive, or speed for no good reason. Still, it will raise some big important questions.

I'm not saying that stuff like that doesn't happen, but what do you think is the ratio between employers abusing their employees compared to employees abusing their employers?

And with the different kinds of abuse, which "side" do you think causes the most genuine harm to the other though their actions?

Bit of a ship of Theseus situation I suppose. Humans have been and will continue to evolve as well, but you still want to credit them as "humans", so why not give the same logic to the bacteria?

If you have public documents, you can obviously let a public search engine index them and show previews. All is good.

If you have private documents, you can't let a public search engine index and show previews of those private documents. Even if you add an authentication wall for normal users if they try to open the document directly. They could still see part of the document in google's preview.

My explanation sounds silly because surely nobody is that dumb, but this is exactly what they have done. They gave access to ALL documents, both public and private, to an AI, and then got surprised when the AI leaked some private document details. They thought they were safe because users would be faced with an authentication wall if they tried to open the document directly. But that doesn't help if copilot simply tells you all the secret in it's own words.

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure there are types of bacteria that has existed long before humanity existed, and will exist long after humanity is gone.

It's roughly the same problem as letting a search engine build indexes (with previews!) of sites without authentication. It's kinda crazy that things were allowed to go this far with such a fundamental flaw.

The biggest reason is most likely that they don't understand serialization, and simply think that objects are somehow being "sent" from one worker to another, which sounds like a cheap reference operation.

You don't understand what Gigachad is talking about. You can buy API credits to gain access to a model in the cloud, and then use that to train your own local model though a process called distilling.

> In this case I'm siding with Oracle.

Only because you don't understand Trademarks. They are not copyrights.

Trademarks exists to protect consumers, so they don't mix together companies and products that have too similar name or branding. So somebody can't release a product called iPhona for $600 in the hopes that somebody will overlook the typo and order it instead of an iPhone for $600.

If a company is not offering a product based on a trademark, that trademark should actively be removed. Oracle is not using the JavaScript trademark.

A much more likely scenario is that it's to hit some sort of internal metric, to have a certain percentage use of AI tools is a goal for management somewhere.

Because it's the truth. If you tell the AI that it's actually a human librarian, it might ask for a raise, or days off. If you tell it to search for something, it might insist that it needs a computer to do that. There will inherently be a information mismatch between reality and your input if the AI is operating on falsehoods.

That has it's own unique problems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waluigi_effect

I think you should read up a little about what private companies have done once they have enough political power. They have actually kicked down people's doors and kidnapped them, murdered protestors, overthrown governments, and enslaved workers.

Check out the browser extension SponsorBlock which automatically skips over the length of such inline sponsorships (database is maintained manually but does a great job).

It makes sense to specialize it on one programming language to dedicate all of the LLM's intellectual space to that one domain, but on the flip side I wonder how much the LLM's sharpness and reasoning capabilities is increased by having more data to train on even if it's the wrong programming language.

As a developer I certainly think my programming skills in a specific language was improved by knowing other languages so I can contrast and compare.

How does the system separate between state changes that must be confirmed by backed compared to state changes that can be updated locally (by prediction) to give the user more snappy experience?

I like to get the chatbot to promise me massive discounts just to get whoever is reading the logs to sweat a little.

...don't get high on your own supply?

It's pretty obvious that these tools are not replacements for developers as of yet. I've tried them, and they are very nifty, and can even do some boring tasks really well, but you can't actually substitute actual developer skill (yet). But everybody is holding their breath because it looks like they might eventually reach that level, and the time-frame for that eventually is unknown.

There was also the programming language Haxe which was like a slightly improved version of AS3/JavaScript that could output to .swf