I think presenting it as AI can be wrong is not as valuable as presenting it as developing the ability to question what one is told. (e.g. Verizon Math)
1,174 karma · joined October 31, 2020
I think presenting it as AI can be wrong is not as valuable as presenting it as developing the ability to question what one is told. (e.g. Verizon Math)
Additionally, Guido never had exclusive control over the Python Software Foundation, from what I can see.
If Guido was the only person responsible for the Python Software Foundation, its only board member, its only share holder that the board is responsible to, and was designing Python for the use-case of a single person, himself, and he was soliciting donations, then yes I would consider those donations to effectively be a contribution to an individual. Of course I would.
However, from DHH:
> Before this can be an amazing system for everyone, it first has to be an amazing system for me, personally.
By DHH's own words, all money currently is 100% spent on DHH's desires. That is a contribution to an individual.
As a result, Motorola's software support is just as important as Motorola's hardware
- - -
From: Anthony Hurtado <[redacted since hn has no scrape protection]>
vpk_read_packet() divides vpk->last_block_size and (par->block_align - vpk->last_block_size) by par->ch_layout.nb_channels without checking for zero.
While vpk_read_header() validates nb_channels > 0, the codec parameters may become zero through format probing misidentification (VPK probe score is 2/3 of AVPROBE_SCORE_MAX) or codec parameter reset, causing SIGFPE.
Fix by:
- Checking nb_channels != 0 before division in vpk_read_packet
- Returning EOF for empty last blocks (last_block_size == 0)
- Validating block_count > 0 in vpk_read_header
- Validating last_block_size <= block_align in vpk_read_header
Found by fuzzing with libFuzzer + AddressSanitizer. Reproduces with 10 distinct inputs.
[patch redacted for brevity]
The worker needs to do a bunch to opt into any given work group, which makes the (lack of) payments extremely unreasonable on top of everything else
And how long will that take? It's already well past due.
It kinda feels like the AWS or Azure of file distribution, so much stuff so confusing. Also apparently with Protocol Labs owning several of those things despite not operating those things?
Ironically seems quite a fragile setup.
Regardless, very sad news.
tar -c x | head -qc $((18*-512)) | gzip > x.tar.gz
tar -c y | head -qc $((18*-512)) | gzip > y.tar.gz
cat {x,y}.tar.gz | gzip -d | tar --list
seems easier to just not have the EOF marker, if you need to append stuff laterThis incorrect conclusion is directly called out in the paper:
> These estimates should be interpreted with a few limitations in mind. First, because 988 was implemented nationally, the design estimates the effects of greater exposure to 988-related local capacity expansion, not the total national effect of 988 relative to no crisis line.
Has that ever been the case? Are they not actively tweaking their models, their fine tuning, the system prompts, the tool definitions and implementations, the guard rails, tool calls, instant responses. There are hundreds of knobs that they can change daily, or between each prompt, or even half way through a generation.
The numbers:
[...]
We estimate average total residential long-term NO2 exposure across the United States to be ∼10 ppbv for people who own a gas stove (∼18 ppbv or more for households in the top 5% of gas burned while cooking) and ∼8 ppbv from total outdoor exposure for those with electric stoves, which cause no additional NO2 exposure.
[...]
Stratifying exposure by gas stove use intensity (i.e. by amount of gas burned while cooking, [...]), we find that people in households burning the 5th, 50th, and 95th percentiles of fuel nationally on average are exposed to 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01–0.07) ppbv, 1.7 (95% CI: 0.8–3.5) ppbv, and 10.3 (95% CI: 4.8–21.7) ppbv, respectively, of additional NO2 exposure from using their gas or propane stoves.
[...]
"LLMs reward expertise" is the title, not that "LLMs only make things possible for those with expertise"
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Resources-Library#now...
As can be seen, it matches on the source, not the destination
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Resources-Library#web...
can match on the destination, however.
Its not a good state of things, but I'm assuming its more of an issue on the browser side as opposed to the extension side
The message is fine, but it was a weird choice to have it on fly.io instead of a personal blog
So are the prior products going to be shut down? If not, then when? if not when, then why not?