Volundr

Far be it from me to doubt a stranger on the Internet, but can you point out any medical textbook or dictionary written pre-2020 that limits the definition of "vaccine" to "attenuated viruses"?

But who would go to all that trouble?

I mean, a company I worked at had a significant amount of money stolen after the attackers spent 6 months sitting on their access waiting for the right moment to fake an (expected) reply to an email exchange. The original breach (or at least the breach of this executives account) involved a very targeted phish. When the potential payout is millions it justifies a lot of effort.

Maintenance should have the autonomy to do as they did

Really? We're talking about letting strangers in through the literal back door.

I couldn't decide which sentence of Alice in Wonderland was my favorite, so I just used the full text.

That's really tough. Marathon, by Bungie, is a good example of why this is tough - it's basically all the Destiny engine, network, and tooling code. When they shut down Destiny, it's not like they have a snapshot of their tooling. They've been continuously updating that tooling for ten years, and now they're using that investment for a new project.

I don't get why you think that makes it harder? Right up until the final version of the game their developers were somehow making changes and testing their changes. It's not like the game grew on its own. What were they using to test those changes? Release that. Job done.

That alone would be an improvement from the status quo, but the SKG movement does go one stop further in wanting publishers to be required to leave the game in a working (local) state of they design it to be dependent on central services they then shut down.

This could be as easy as releasing the tools they used for development when developing the game.

I'm sorry my pun bothered you so.

Sure, it increases one's borrowing power and that can be useful. But "I can use it to go deeper into debt" is pretty limited utility compared to other kinds of wealth.

I'm using it to mean someone who doesn't have a place to live. Like say someone who just sold their house and didn't go and use that money to buy a different house. Yes, that's very different than the person asking for change on the street corner, but I thought it was pretty clear from context which I'd be.

We've conflated having a home with a financial asset.

And it's a really, really shitty one. My house has roughly doubled in value since I bought it, but in practice that's useless to me. I can't claim that value without rendering myself homeless. If anything it reduces my mobility by making it harder to move, since I really need to coordinate the sale of my current home with buying the new one to help absorb that $500k or whatever price tag.

My if house prices dropped by 50% or more drops my net worth on paper, but it doesn't actually change anything. I still have a place to live + my savings, investments, etc.

now I have joined the majority of the population and will no longer cast my vote.

then they are just disenfranchising a different group of people, me.

"They" aren't disenfranchising you, you are disenfranchising you. You have the same access to vote you always did, your just choosing not to exercise it.

No, I said exactly the opposite. My exact words:

I wish he'd sign that executive order and tilt that windmill in the courts instead of the stuff he is pushing.

You say you were very clear, but I genuinely don't understand what about that you disagree with.

I'm not sure what your saying here? Trump lies so you'd rather his energy be spent on ICE raids, ending birthright citizenship, and illegal tarrifs than ending daylight savings? Personally I'd rather the latter but you do you.

Trump's said he wants to end it. That's something I'd back him on. I wish he'd sign that executive order and tilt that windmill in the courts instead of the stuff he is pushing. I'd be rooting for him!

I guess it's "only" 40 years, but my 1985 Civic was an amazing car. Definitely not a death trap, but after I did end selling it for a 99 Acura with airbags. Still kind of regret that one. My house was built in 1970, it's enough for the two of use, but would admittedly be cramped for more. That said at 850 square feet, it's quite a bit smaller than the 1,400 average for 1970.

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/real-estate-...

How do I know the time zone of an integer? Sure there are plenty of cases where one doesn't care, but there are also many cases where the original time zone is important.

I mean if we're being pedantic, unless there's something I missed the regulation you linked above only deals with shifting out of park, not starting the vehicle, but point taken, either Toyota has been flagrantly skirting regulations for a decade, or his car won't move without first depressing the brake (I don't think Toyota was making manual Rav4s that late, but haven't researched). I actually don't think my Accura will let me do it either (without putting a key in the bypass), but I'm not quite motivated enough to go out and check. My Baja is manual and would have no problem.

Quantified, "plenty of cars" is not a number.

I mean did it need to be one? Unless you think I'm the only person whose managed to keep a car running over ~20 years the fact that we're around is enough to make it plausible we're talking a car predating them. But since your curious, it looks like ~40% of the cars on the road are from before 2010.

https://hedgescompany.com/blog/2024/02/average-age-of-cars-t...

Yes, my riding lawnmower manual also tells me not to clear debris from the blade while the mower is running. Yet somehow I don't think the mower will stop if I do.

I don't know if this model has a brake interlock on the ignition or not, but the fact that it's part of the instructions for starting the vehicle doesn't imply the presence of one.

My 2006 Baja and 99 Acura Integra both don't have one. My 2024 Ioniq however will start in "accessory mode". There are plenty of cars on the road today that don't.

Bears don't like well seasoned hikers?

The article keeps saying he was arrested for going a few seconds over, which is weird because it also contains this statement:

"Feary then notified police to have Blanchard removed. I informed Blanchard that he was asked to leave and needed to do so. Blanchard then continued to the front of the room where counselors sat behind a table and insisted on giving them paperwork,” according to the police report. “Sergeant Singer then directed me to place Blanchard under arrest for trespassing. Blanchard was placed in handcuffs, escorted from the property, and transported to Rogers County Jail."

The video seems to back up that account, showing him being told he needs to leave, and him instead walking to the front with paperwork, before finally being arrested.

To be clear I don't think this justifies the charges, but it's weird the article repeatedly frames it like he just went a couple second over and was immediately slapped in cuffs, marched out and charged.

Reply in thread from Bunny: https://old.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1sglytg/bunnycdn_ha...

Did I say my Claw (not Open) doesn't have internet access?

My email filtering system surfaces only the mails that are relevant right now - I can check the rest later.

So then you have not actually addressed the concerns expressed in my post. You indeed have an LLM with both email access and Internet access. Exactly the scenario I described. The amount of trouble those two accesses together can cause is huge.

None of these require an LLM to have free rein to modify things for me.

Give me read access to your email and an Internet connection and I bet I can come up with all sorts of ways to modify things for you. So can an LLM. If your lucky it won't.

So what do you do with your OpenClaw instance that has read-only access to your email and no Internet access?

Like what?

Ignoring that you've just cut off a whole vector of usefulness, how do I keep it from exfilling my inbox to the Internet in response to a malicious email? Or using its access to take control of my online accounts?

Honest question, this kind of stuff is what keeps me from using it.

What I find crazy is the sheer amount of access and trust involved in these LLMs. Every time I think about something I might like to do with it, I think about the amount of damage the LLM could do, e.x. even with read only access to my email combined with Internet access, and nope out. It's wild to me anyone trusts these things unsupervised.

GitHub is cagey about the criteria, but yes this is ongoing. It doesn't appear to be tied to active contributions though. I'm a maintainer on paper of a moderately large open source project that I haven't been involved with in years, and they still renew my free copilot monthly.

I don't think they did, they said machine translation is considered AI, that is, it's the subset of things that are AI. Not that they are one and the same.

Here you go: https://web.archive.org/web/20200929085743/https://en.wikipe...

Admittedly I don't think this uses the term AI, but "deep learning" and "artificial neural network" are indeed AI, and if you follow those links in the Wikipedia article you will indeed find them described as such.

An agent, named Adi, would pay me $110 to deliver a bouquet of flowers to Anthropic, as a special thanks for developing Claude, its chatbot.

This wasn’t mentioned in the listing, but the name of an AI startup was featured at the bottom of the note I was supposed to deliver with the flowers.

The job was presented as delivering flower as a thank you, but instead was a marketing stunt. Unless you think the AI just spontaneously decided to sign it's thank you note with a random unaffiliated AI startups name.