Krssst

The article does state clearly first that it was first drafted with AI, I appreciate the author's honesty. I wish all AI-assisted articles would do the same.

Also, LSP can turn Sublime Text into almost an IDE (but much more performant).

> crazy anti-LLM policies

Weird how justified reasonable policies get the "crazy" label.

Not so sure, if the LLM has been overfitted and can just throw back something equivalent to the original code, then it's no different from a human having seen the code and writing something similar afterwards.

On another hand, I'd be curious about Microsoft's reaction if somebody let an agent write a "perfect" Windows emulator/compatibility layer eating away at Windows's market share (assuming that's possible; since it does not exist it's probably not currently). Would not do much for kernel anti-cheats but would help for productivity software. Microsoft could either choose to say this is not a white box implementation and take down the project but it would hurt anything LLM-related since all LLM-based projects could be targeted, or let it live and eat away at Windows (I suspect they'd choose the latter because it's the shiny new thing and would probably not hurt Windows that much).

I generally assume Wine cannot use LLMs considering developers that have been in contact with Windows code cannot contribute and LLMs almost certainly were.

Edit: for reference: https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/wikis/Developer-FAQ

No such reference to LLMs possibly being trained on Windows code however. Well maybe AI companies were careful to remove problematic data from the training set.

I wonder what Windows would be like if it was split off Microsoft. Technically it has far sufficient revenue to keep being maintained and updated well, but I guess the quest for ever more revenue would still lead to it becoming more and more enshittified.

I wonder what it would become if it was split off Microsoft and given to two competing companies.

Is it? Pangram disagrees and human-made photos imply at least some human effort.

Ah, sorry, I was only replying to the above comment but did not mean to imply that the tutorial might be AI-written; it very much looks human-written and generally a nice read :-)

I don't want to read LLM written text (EDIT: just replying to parent comment, not implying at all that the tutorial might be written that way; it definitely does not look like it). It would be nice if people could just disclose when they used LLMs for their writing and how, then people who care can skip and people who don't can read. Of course this would have to come with not shaming the people who disclose actual use of LLM, otherwise we're back to square one.

Sure, my point is that it would not have been enough to divert climate change, though it would have probably bought a few years/decade and allowed public discourse to move above "nuclear vs wind power" while burning more and more coal, and start discussing other problems. (on another hand, everything that public discourse touches gets politicized to stupidity so I'm not sure if I'd rather have the public choose how to decarbonize concrete production or some magical alternative that does not involve the general public talking about it).

Thank you for creating it!

Successful massive nuclear and renewable deployment at world scale, would it have happened, would have only solved one third of the problem. Agriculture, construction and all carbon-emitting industry processses (steel production) require their own solution too.

https://www.unslop.news/ has been a breeze of fresh air to avoid all the LLM news. I don't care so much about them but there's so much LLM-adjacent content that it requires actual effort to find the non-LLM stuff.

Sorry, somewhat of a tangent but regarding:

> The %0 and %1 are positional references into a list you have to count by hand.

You can name your operands in gcc inline assembly.

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html#Output-...

Look for "asmSymbolicName".

On a phone so not checking if it builds, but something like `asm("add %[my_out], %[my_in], #3":[my_out]"=r"(outvar):[my_in]"r"(invar):);`.

Can't wait for vibe coded car brakes.

Musk is not just a republican, he's pushing far-right parties everywhere else in the world (plus, the "roman" thing). He's the textbook definition of why social networks should not have recommendation algorithms other than "chronological view of who you actively chose the follow".

He can say whatever he wants, but buying one of the biggest social network to push his ideology onto billions leaves "freedom of saying whatever one wants" territory to enter "let's buy elections by controlling what enter people's feeds".

For the last point: https://www.franceinfo.fr/environnement/energie/energies-ren... (in French)

The associated pseudoscience has a wikipedia page too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geobiology_(pseudoscience)

It always feels weird to see so much more complaining about Firefox than Chrome and Edge, while it's still so very much far ahead in terms of respecting user choices. All AI features can easily be turned off (and I am assuming those respect user privacy better than the ones of Chrome/Edge). When you say no to Firefox, it remembers it. Chrome keeps asking me every few days / weeks to become the default browser.

If we lose Firefox the web is going to be a worse place to be in.

I use the web version and when clicking an artist's name I only see a description for well-known ones. Other channels don't show any description even though the YouTube side has one.

I assume one requirement for getting genAI tracks is being initially fine with hearing music from random channels and also hearing music produced after 2022; if one only cares (for example) about pre-2020 very well-known music they're probably going to be safe.

YT Music would be be better if I did not have to double check every of its suggestion for AI generation. Some accounts to make their AI use public which is nice but there's no way to see their channel info in YT Music to look for that.

Buying a cheap secondhand motherboard is still less lousy than losing access to a game collection. I did that with a 13 years old computer and it cost 50€.

I agree that the current situation sucks, but I don't think one can say it locks someone on your situation out of your game collection.

(edit: misremembered, $2000 is not the price of the game collection)

I live in Japan too. Sure there's very few trees in cities and more would help, but at the same time it's so hot that I doubt this would make cities significantly more livable in summer. We're not talking about some moderate summer heat like 33C low humidity. It's 36C high humidity in the afternoon and getting higher with climate change. In summer, the outside during daytime is for going from some place with AC to some other place with AC. Some people have to work for long time outside and they need something significantly stronger than a few trees to protect their lives.

With that being said, I agree some more trees would be nice.

Firefox's reader mode works really well on the article, I wonder why it's not the default for unstyled pages.

I would bet on the sunscreen being a better protection since it also protects against reflected light, but UV umbrellas are so much more convenient. Takes 2s to take out rather than 5min to apply sunscreen properly.

(except when it's windy. Rain usually follows the wind, sunlight does not)

Summers are very hot and humid. Expect max temps of 36C high humidity throughout July and August, possibly the best part of September. Some trees bringing down the temperature by 2C (random figure, curious about the real one) would be nice but silver bullet.

Tried to buy LTSC IoT from there a while ago, got rejected for not being a business. Normal people don't deserve Windows without the permanent disrespect of user choices apparently. (not blaming them, I assume that's just Microsoft's policy)

Can run on modern 64-bit windows too with otvdm: https://github.com/otya128/winevdm

Another way to think about this: if the compiler has a miscompilation, the user is usually not blamed for the mistake (unless gross lack of QA). If the LLM makes a mistake, the user gets full blame. Thus, slowly combing over the output is required.

If we get precise detectors and LLM posts don't get shown by social networks recommendation algorithms as a result, the chances of people starting to talk like LLMs get lower.

We can measure false positive rate. The detector in the arricle is 85% accurate (not sure about false positives, but let's assume) which is too low to make conclusions, but enough when browsing the web and skipping reading likely-slop withiut accusing anyone.

If the false positive rate becomes <1% then it's better. The alternative is the world drowning under slop so I'd rather have imperfect detectors and have users aware they may fail in rare cases to avoid witch hunts. The general issue is that people only realize they're reading slop halfway through which is frustrating. If you know it from the start thanks to a detector and move on without commenting, no time waste, no frustration, less negativity towards LLM users.