1,692 karma · joined March 19, 2013
Of course, we also paid for local calls so things never got as popular as they were in the US.
If I force them on with something like gtk3-nocsd[1], then although I get my normal window manager decorations back, sometimes the client-side decorations have actual important widgets in them like menu buttons. When that happens, I end up with windows that have both kinds of decorations, and it looks weird.
For me this means that it's not nice to use apps like Meld and Remmina.
Just let me use my own WM's decorations please!
A lot of websites back in the 90s were just made up of images that were clickable using image maps. It was not a fun time.
I get what the parent comment is saying, though, and it's why I use Gemini (the protocol[0], not the AI). It doesn't align with corporate interests, but for now I consider that a good thing.
From a purely secular standpoint, my understanding as a layman is that consciousness is generated through the electrical impulses taking place in our brain every day. The neurons are physical, unlike the modelled neurons in machine learning models. That means that the actual electrical impulses have their own imperfections/weirdnesses that are probably not simulated in a machine learning model... but we quantise the weights anyway in most cases, which is probably more of an issue.
Making actual neuron components out of silicon on the scale needed for a LLM is beyond our current capacity, given that LLM models have many billions of parameters. We're good, but not that good.[0]
Using actual living neurons would be unethical as you'd need to source them from somewhere. So the only other option would be synthesising them ourselves. If this ever happens (or maybe when it happens)... what do we call the resulting creation? Does that count as consciousness?
Or am I looking at this the wrong way?
[0] [Edit: Turns out that when I said "we're not that good", I might be wrong. Within the last few months, IBM introduced the first sub-nanometer node chip: https://research.ibm.com/blog/sub-1nm-node-chips . So... maybe it is in fact possible.]
I feel like this has only been Numberwang once when I've played with friends. Am I playing it wrong?
A "scraper" is simply an automated process that fetches URLs intended for display to a human, and processes it. The act of scraping doesn't imply anything about:
1. The frequency of the fetches,
2. The way that the resulting page is processed.
Search engines scrape. Again, they have to. Same goes for archive.org.
Thing is, there aren't tens of thousands of search engines/archive.orgs that can overload a site at once.
The LLM likely needs to be reminded of its abilities.
I obviously meant "check them out" here. I was using speech recognition and it clearly misheard what I said.
I'd edit, but it's been long enough since I posted that HN isn't offering that option for this comment any more.
https://esolangs.org/wiki/Hello
While quines (programs that print their own source code) aren't possible in Hello, there's a version that makes it possible:
https://esolangs.org/wiki/Hello_Plus_Plus
And if you say the original isn't good enough because it can't do anything else... well, esolangs have you covered there too:
https://esolangs.org/wiki/HQ9_Plus
(It should be noted that these are all joke esolangs. There are actual languages on the wiki that are very interesting though - I would definitely recommend you take them out!)
And keeping it completely disconnected from the internet should be the default, in my opinion.
> Additionally, he is a co-host of the All In podcast...
The comment you replied to linked to an account on X called theallinpod, so there's a strong link there.
[Edited to clarify.]
The post covers that:
> ...while we had tested and validated this sandbox, the agents were able to chain together previously unknown vulnerabilities (“0-days”) in the package management service exposed within the sandbox to bypass restrictions, as detailed in the technical incident report.
Anyone who can code a game can put in a 0-day too. Should we ban games?
That isn't enough for me. I don't just want to not see the ads, I want to stop them being fetched entirely.
There are two big problems with ads.
* The ad network can build up a very complete profile of what you like, dislike, and generally what you're looking at on the web. Yes, that profile is "anonymised" so far as it goes, but in reality, that doesn't really matter. If you know what you're looking for, there would be enough tells in the data that can de-anonymise you. Covering up the ads doesn't stop this data being collected; it merely stops you wanting to click on the ad.
* Ads are a very common malware delivery system, and although nowadays it's probably less common to have an ad that will auto-download malware without you clicking it, there are instances of it happening in the past. Stopping ads from being fetched entirely would obviously prevent this.