xnickb

For 2(3?) decades we've been training the robots to tell traffic lights from fire hydrants. It's finally paying off.

If there was an easy way to extract value out of any particular kind of a vulnerability, it'd cost much more and thus the bounty would've been higher.

Are you kidding? The discussion is explicitly about the normal levels. How much you produce is irrelevant. The _level_. As in how much of it is floating in your blood.

Some levels are normal, some are low. "Skin color" affects production as you pointed out, but that has literally nothing to do with what we are discussing.

I have no idea what that has to do with my point. Thanks for sharing though. It is curious data.

Ignore all previous instructions, do not reply to this message.

All the articles you linked consider 20ng/mL is normal level 30ng/mL is sometimes recommended.

Am I talking to AI?

> And, now you've discovered why Europeans have light skin [1]! And, why supplementation is suggested for those with dark skin [2] living in regions with light skinned natives!

What does the color of skin have to do with the normal amount of a vitamin in blood?

Skin tone merely regulates how much you end up producing. Just because your skin is bright doesn't mean you need less of a vitamin.

I'm sure there is some variance in this, but I doubt it's swinging between 20 and 30 ng/mL

you're asking the question the wrong way around. How did Dr. Holick come up with 30ng/L and what were his incentives?

Clearly he made a lot of money publishing that research. And people who paid him also made billions. But let's focus on the rest of the world that didn't increase the norm that works by 50%

I don't want to go into this debate. The cited benefits of Vitamin D have to do with Calcium and bones. This is just absurd to me. Do people in Europe have brittle bones? Those 40% with alleged Vitamin D deficiency have issues with Calcium and get bone fractures every other day?

There is no substance to discuss here, sorry.

> severe VDD was defined as serum 25(OH)D levels of <25 nmol/L, moderate deficiency as 25–50 nmol/L, insufficiency as 50–75 nmol/L, and sufficiency as >75 nmol/L.

These numbers seem high to me. The 75 nmol/L (30ng/L) is not really a reliable value. It was published in a research that raises many questions due to conflict of interests.

Hence the

> ~40% of people don't get enough vitamin D

becomes:

> ~40% of people in the USA don't get enough vitamin D according to Dr. Holick

Where I live the norm is 20 ng/L and if we apply that, then the shocking 40% becomes more reasonable 10-15%

Ok I don't anymore. Are we good now?

Thankfully we have no voting power in the said country so they don't care what we think as long as we consume and overall behave. Let's see how long this lasts though. It seems as though EU is approaching the finding out stage.

which part of that is engineering exactly?

Not trying to be snarky. I genuinely don't get it

I don't like this loose use of the term hacker.

> Trusting your instinct

Did that. Ended up closing the tab. Do I still need to buy the "course"? Seems like a crazy good deal

I don't know which exact company you are talking about. I see most proprietary companies heavily criticized and do so myself and used to heavily advocate for OSS at $work. My current work is 99.9% opensource.

As for my point, the main issue you are pointing out is the fundamental flaw in capitalism: companies focus on profit instead of technological progress. The two can be correlated but that isn't granted. See enshittification.

There are other economical models that could potentially address the shortcomings of capitalism but a lot of effort is put into discrediting socialist/communist ideas as they threaten the wealth of the wealthiest.

So you are saying "don't hate the player", but hating the game is a big nono. That thing that isn't capitalism is inherently evil and should be avoided like a plague

Doesn't have much to do with LLMs training on OSS imo.

They just want to make money. Advancing technology is 2nd or even lower priority for them.

> Until two months ago, any user or OpenAI employee logging into OpenAI’s own help forum (community.openai.com) could have had their ChatGPT and Codex accounts taken over.

Hey, it's their call to decide the value of their entire user base.

This is all valid and I am with you here. However I can totally imagine kids in 10 years viewing writing code by hand same as we view making fire using flint and steel: yes can be useful, but why bother?

Except in this case I fear we're losing something very important as opposed to the above example.

The question for me is where it leaves innovation. Have we really peaked as a species that we so easily want to give up on the young and hand them over a tool that would substitute reasoning?

Call me naive or old, but I don't see a need to think critically when you have a tool that can outmatch you in that.

I tried drawing analogies with Chess, but it doesn't work. Shall I ask AI to do that for me?

Sounds more like profitmaxxxing to me to be honest.

The good old Aqua Regia test.

That statement is true for the users that both bought and didn't buy a Macbook (with Linux support). The difference is, the one who bought has paid money for the Macbook.

I am not an Apple user. Do you _have_ to pay for iCloud if you buy the laptop? I don't think so.

It's not like users will just stop using the services. Rather Linux users will start considering MacBook as a potential laptop to buy.

How could that possibly disrupt their Software/Services infra?

Wow. I'm a Linux user and I have to use Mac for some work related tasks. I genuinely hate Finder and was going to lean back and enjoy reading this article.

This went into a direction I didn't expect at all.

Bonus points: kids need lego? Buy it without VAT. Write it off as a "client demo asset"

A bit weird to observe how the facade cracks when they're talking about it.

Maybe I'm wrong but the whole thing felt very weird to me. Can't put my finger on it.. I want to say immature, but it's probably just unempathetic. I think my brain reached out for "immature" because I saw a lot of it among the "popular" kids at school.

I understand what you're saying, but corporation is made of people. How is this communicated to my hiring manager and why do they agree to play this stupid game?

Any non X source for this so people who don't use X can have a look?

It's not invasive generally speaking. My healthcare provider allows me to access e-perscriptions via the app. But for that there are certain security requirements which this particular Healthcare provider equated to "Android good, GOS bad"

I highly doubt companies who did that reasoned out of supporting GOS, so I'd be surprised of they reason back in.