omegalulw

> The old app that I wrote would happily take JavaScript or SQL snippets as inputs to any text field and do The Right Thing.

Confused here. Where were input validation checks in your implementation? How did you guard against SQL injection, etc?

Can't have context if the file never loads.

This seems...wrong?

Let's say you can control voltage, cross section area A.

Now, you want a constant power across a load P = V * I.

Your net resistance R is C + D * L / A where C and D are constants and L is your cable length.

I is proportional go V * A / (C * A + E) where E is also a constant.

So your load power is proportional V^2* C * A / (C * A + E) which is proportional to V^2 * A / (A + F) where F is also a constant.

With a large "enough" A, this is effectively V^2. With a small A, this is V^2 * g where g is A / F. So the smaller the area you have the more power you are wasting (roughly equal to V^2 * (1-g) which is heat in the wires).

So the smaller area you have, the less efficient your power delivery. And juicing up your source power is a lot more expensive than juicing up your source voltage.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but if I insert all 32 bit keys, does that not take 32*2^32 space?

To be fair, I'm not sure if you can demodulate a 100MHz FM signal digitally. DSP at this frequency on an Arduino maybe be infeasible (you need a phase locked loop). I suppose if you used a bandpass + low pass filter you can pull it off but that will be a lot more work still.

Wrong way to think about the problem. Lowering bits does not mean lowering model capacity. Its the opposite in fact - it allows you to you to fit more parameters.

This is not that relevant for ML. Each gradient pass will re-compute your cost function and the gradients so errors are not likely to accumulate. The main thing is to not make errors big enough that you end up in a completely different part of the parameter space derailing progress which is what the above commenter points out.

You want to ask the author to change the commit you are interested in and then review the diff to that commit.

This is if course mostly valuable if you don't squash commits on merge. Otherwise, the extra rebase work isn't that valuable.

That was my question to. 8cc is doing the heavy lifting of compiling C.

I wonder how well WPA3 fares here.

I think you can encrypt ethernet comms too using 802.1x RADIUS. That's as secure as Wi-Fi and removes the need for an isolated network (which, when unencrypted isn't as secure as you think, e.g. MiTM). Ideally you connect via both but that's overkill for most use cases.

I don't know if this guy really cheated or not, but from my glance through I don't see even an explanation of the mechanism he would use to cheat OTB.

But this is a cry wolf situation - I would be surprised if there isn't some terms or condition that allows chess.com to ban known cheaters esp from a tourney with such a big prize.

Presumably the point is to do something with i rather than just printing.

I don't understand this attitude. Who is the judge of what ideas are great and what ideas are idiotic?

> But sometimes, especially along the periphery, the right choice is to just make the change and be okay with perpetuating a bad pattern, if it is going to bring disproportionate business value quickly

Agreed. Also tests - if the tests are catching the cases they are supposed to but have anti patterns in the way they are written - it's not always worth it to fix them so long as your new test cases can be easily covered.

+1. You will find such positions often championed by people who don't understand how machine learning works - but maybe have tried out a fancy tool that used such a model (GPT-2, Stable Diffusion, etc). Classic example of "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" combined with Dunning–Kruger effect.

You are selling SQL way short. SQL has stuck around because, compared to its complexity, it lets you do incredibly powerful things.

This blew my mind. Fantastic explanation.

Personally, I love cheesy dialogue in games like this.

You are mixing separate problems. People still bought 20M copies, that's a success in itself. That said people buying 20M copies of a "broken" game is certainly a depressing trend - same with people supporting games riddled with microtransactions.

Compile time and non-optimized builds aren't what you want to consider when you care about code that's going to run across thousands of cores or ultra low latency work - those are the cases where you should be considering C++ in the first place.

> I've been using C++ since 1993. I still don't understand how I've written all this code and never once found myself using, or wishing I could use std::move.

No offense, but are you using modern C++? One of the most common uses of std::move is around ownership transfer of std::unique_ptr - most moderately big projects will have those. Other uses are around preventing copies, etc but those need more thought since you may actually cause regressions by getting in the compiler's way.

It's hard to pull this off, if not impossible. A key attribute of proof of work systems is that the difficulty should be dynamically adjustable and that everyone has perfect consensus on what "work" is. Doing meaningful work, while admirable, puts the owners of those projects in control of defining "work" and adjusting difficulty, i.e., people in the loop. That's not trustworthy from a currency POV, no matter who the people are.

> They realized suckers will pay insane amounts for the cards, even disregarding prior crypto.

Press X to doubt. People are PISSED, and the 30 series is already excellent value. 4090 will sell but I have my doubts on the 4080 (esp 12 GB).

Except that there's sooooo many instances of parents being abused by the "not-weak" to rent seek and prevent innovation outright.

Not an excuse.

Crop rotation is agriculture 101 at this point. A diversity in crops being grown could very well lead to higher yields overall, including that of rice and wheat, even if they are not grown as often.

What's your reasons?

It's not about creating demand. It's about creating wild swings in demand AND supply. Miners buy en masse when profitable and sell when not. That's what messes up the market. Gamers won't do that.

I would like to see independent benchmarks for 4090 before making judgements. "2-4x" as claimed over 3090 Ti is not a small bump.