trklausss

Why? Imagine that you are a competing, close source product/project. Just bombard your competition with AI reports, and let them drown in misery. Problem solved! (/s)

This just goes to show that yes, if security researchers were to do that, it would great, but they are not the only actors here...

That’s crazy to me: they already have to go through certification for the 2.4GHz stuff, why not include a lower wifi standard in there (for the 2.4GHz band)…

I’d say as well, that a huge difference is a microcontroller has direct access memory (I.e. without translation), and a bigger computers CPU/SoC has an MMU (memory management unit) that does address translation. This is a key hardware difference for isolation of multiple processes, which you don’t typically have in a microcontroller (you _could_ have an MPU to give you some partitioning, but that’s further down the road).

I'm curious how an integration into Schengen Area could actually work... Or does it just mean no passport controls?

Also, to be able to sell stuff, you gotta comply with the CE rules one way or another, there is no free card here.

About competition in Eurovision: absolutely, would love for them to participate, even if just as guest state :D

LMAO just googled it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_in_the_Eurovision_Song_...

Speedometers being under is a European thing. All manufacturers are required to show more speed speed than you are doing, up to an error depending on the current speed.

Wait until you discover gradians: centesimal system applied to angles. A turn is 400 gradians, right angles are 100 gradians.

Same advantages as here but multiplied times 400...

The thing is, right now it is exploding because we are at the beginning of it. At some point, it will plateau at a specific level, and not that much quality will be gained. There is however leaps to make for efficiency.

The same can be said about the CISC computer: yes, new processors introduce new instructions that do something slightly faster, you could still crunch that with an older processor. The real benefit comes in clock cycles (that's why Arm with a reduced set can compete with x86).

Also: there are myriads of models, for myriads of tasks. Not all have the same development gains as we see for general purpose AI. If you etch those, you reduce your bill by factors down.

It also democratises models: Instead of running them on a cloud server by some company, you can run them at home, for coding tasks, without the need of internet connection, etc.

I'll note this one down. I was under the impression that yes, retyping helps learning something about a language and architecture, but I found myself forgetting it after a while...

Trying it first sounds slower, but definitely better for cognitive training :)

I use a VPN to have access to my HomeAssistant instance at home, where I can control every aspect of the house. Without this, I would have to pay for a domain name, manage the certificates, and exposing myself to external attacks. So, for me, a VPN reduces massively the attack surface.

There is this law, where if you don't see the purpose of something, is probably because you never needed it. Which is fine, but don't gatekeep others wanting to use them.

Edit: OP forgot to format text, so my anger should be directed to however said the quote...

It is a sort of LAN network over the Internet. That way, you can connect to devices as if you were in the local network, but having them exposed to the internet.

Traffic is encrypted so there is noone knowing what you are sending, they can still trace that is coming to/from a specific node.

This will also come in handy, when ISPs in Spain turn off VPNs when football plays on the screen:

https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/la-ligas-...

I guess accessing a streaming service without permission is considered a copyright violation, but blanket-blocking them based on copyright infringement will be legally difficult now...

The article frames a GPU cluster as if it was rocket science. If you swap a GPU cluster with, say, a power plant, the question doesn't change a bit. Also high complexity, multiple variables, you don't know the current output power, scheduled maintenance, skilled labor needed etc.

In the end, they will either figure it out, or contract a company that can figure it out. Truth is, there will be many companies wanting to do the rental of those clusters for AI...

This is what I hate about AI. Not that people use it, it's great to accelerate specific workflows, make less mistakes etc. It's just blindly trusting it and just saying "Make a post about a CV library release, make no mistakes" and calling it a day.

Where is the human creativity in writing release notes gone?

This is how I treated LLMs from the beginning, maybe because of my impostor syndrome of not knowing if my understanding of _anything_ is correct, and going down the rabbit hole of the concepts that are presented there...

Now the question to the round: in your opinion, are LLMs ok to learn in this way? At least on the theoretical side of things?

I think there is worlds between definitely defining what consciousness is, and what are some of the scenarios and conditions under which consciousness cannot ever happen.

And on top of that, they put a sedative, just in case.

> But to me the challenge is that it’s hard to imagine everything that needs to be preemptively captured and prohibited. I have to imagine this stuff for living, and I literally did not think anyone would just move a mouse pointer like this.

In requirements engineering, you do only codify things in the positive sense. The reason behind is that the system shall only do things that are described. If there are no things described, the system shall do nothing.

You can forbid a lot of things, but then you would have pages upon pages of requirements telling you things you may not even wanted implemented in the first place.

Nice to see it’s being put to good use. I used to fly the rodeo thermals with a glider… Missing the cloud machine :’)

Honestly, that doesn't sound too bad. It does not say you can't use LLMs, it just doesn't let LLMs be the author of a commit. Meaning, if you as a developer make yourself responsible for what the LLM wrote, go ahead. But be ready to answer the technical questions, be ready to get grilled in the code review, and be called if you get a CVE on that part of the code...

You are clearly not Finn (/s)

For all we know, there is a link between cardiac/circulatory problems and arteriosclerosis (that is, loss of elasticity of the vessels).

So it could be that exercise helps keep this elasticity, the same way maybe sauna does? Also antioxidants from vegetables etc.

So it could be that it is a _factor_, but definitely needs way more study.

I am also not in the medical field, but I think arteriosclerosis is a well known link for cardiovascular disease.

Jokes on you I got a 20kWh backup UPS on the entire house.

Now on a serious note: internet can go down anywhere, even for them. There is nowhere stated that, if your old hardware misbehaves, you can use others, and there are privacy concerns with running your stuff on their software stack… So I don’t see a huge advantage honestly.

What's the difference between this and 1. setting my laptop at home and 2. connect it through Tailscale?

I lose ownership of my laptop, you install whatever software you want on it (with the security risks that it conveys) and in turn "you let me connect to my computer"?

What? They should freaking think of sanctions, not about "how easy is to lose Google account". Both Google and Apple are American companies. If someone lands on a sanctions list, they close your account without further notice [1].

Let me get this straight: you can be a defender of human rights, aligned with the country you live in, but if you fall in disgrace with the American government, _you can't even do transactions with your own country_.

So this is fundamentally flawed, and violates the fundamental rights of German citizens in Germany.

[1] https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/british-icc-chief-prosecutor-l...

Knowing the German, how much of a fiasco will this be? Many Germans despise having to go online with specific services due to "Datenschutz". Now you are telling them that they need an external (American) service in order to use this?

What I don't understand is: ELSTER (taxes) already uses electronic signatures, don't these signature already fulfil the requirements of eIDAS? Why do we even need Google/Apple?

Does anyone know which platform this webpage uses? I like the aesthetics and functionality :)

Yeah I agree. Since Russia is mostly empty and they have a lot of oil, let's put all refineries there! (/s)

This is to show that there is more geopolitically than meets the eye.

In some industries it’s critical. Think about aerospace where code is almost always homegrown or done by specialized company, and are specific implementations for specific needs. You don’t have that many COTS due to the criticality etc.

We need laws that force Agents to be identified to their "masters" when doing these things... Good luck in the current political climate.

The question is: if we keep the same context and model, and the same LLM configuration (quantization etc.), does it provide the same output at same prompt?

If the answer is no, then we cannot be sure to use it as a high-level language. The whole purpose of a language is providing useful, concise constructs to avoid something not being specified (undefined behavior).

If we can't guarantee that the behavior of the language is going to be the same, it is no better than prompting someone some requirements and not checking what they are doing until the date of delivery.

Ah, people are starting to see the light.

This is something that could be distilled from some industries like aviation, where specification of software (requirements, architecture documents, etc.) is even more important that the software itself.

The problem is that natural language is in itself ambiguous, and people don't really grasp the importance of clear specification (how many times I have repeated to put units and tolerances to any limits they specify by requirements).

Another problem is: natural language doesn't have "defaults": if you don't specify something, is open to interpretation. And people _will_ interpret something instead of saying "yep I don't know this".