dangerface

Yup even when you tell it your version it forgets pretty quickly. Or agrees it messed up and assures you this time it will give you the correct info for your version number then gives you the same command.

Javascript is a nightmare as they change everything constantly. PHP has backwards compatibility for everything so its not really an issue.

It also gives out dated info on salesforce, and im not just talking about the latest and greatest, it recommends stuff that was deprecated years ago.

ZSA Moonlander is an easy avoid. They have a defect on their thumb cluster, the plastic that holds them to the main board is thin and breaks after a few years of use. Good thing they sell spares so they can be easily repaired but bad thing is trying to order them. They don't want just any one buying parts and even sending a photo proof you own a broken Moonlander is not acceptable, they want a receipt of the original purchase or they refuse to sell them.

Since you don't use IRC for anything more than an unreliable and easily spoofable key value store, why bother with implementing an IRC client? You could easily write a client server on UDP 58 client sends the key and server replies the value. Create a list of 13 IP we just trust and run your dnssec on top of that? Ez

You claim here that there is a cost to creating the domain but rule out Ens because it has a cost? You can't make both claims. You can generate Ethereum and buy domains with it much in the same way you do here.

You rule out DNS as it doesn't have a standard registration but IRC doesn't have a standard way to register channels nickserv isn't on all IRC and they have different implementations.

IRC is not distributed it's owned by a centralised provider who has complete control, they can trivially take over any domain they want.

IRC has no consensus mechanisms a netsplit would make it trivial to create duplicate channels on the same IRC network.

You check channel availability then register, this by definition isn't atomic, it's a race condition between check and register. You need a way to wrap this in a transaction to prevent the race condition. IRC provides no way to do transactions. Even registering a channel on a network is not atomic because of the potential of netsplits, which is stated in the rfc.

How are networks choosen and distributed? You picked 11 random servers that meet your requirements. If I pick 11 random servers how are their ips shared? Traditionally this is done with DNS but since you are trying to replace this requiring it is odd, how do you stop some one just hijacking your DNS once that problem is solved your scheme becomes pointless.

If you expect everyone to use the same 11 servers this isn't distributed, it's centralised to 11 servers you can't trust.

I think you are under the impression that IRC is distributed and so if you build a secure system on top of it, then the system as a whole will be secure and distributed. The problem is that IRC isn't secure or distributed it's centralised with no Byzantine fault tolerance.

I understand you check multiple channels/networks in an attempt to provide this protection but the underlying servers can do anything they want and there is nothing you can do about that. Finally getting to the point of being on IRC and checking a channel has a lot of attack points none of which are accounted for.

The difficult part of any distributed bysentain tolerant system is the distributed bysentain problem IRC doesn't solve this problem and your scheme outsources it to IRC.

Charcircuit is just telling you the truth you don't want to accept.

They will keep selling cars but put more focus on their AI capabilities to stay on trend. I think we can already see this with their llm and robots, once they start making their own chips Elon will want vertical integration and start making their own silicone. the focus will be more on the autonomy of the car and larger tesla ecosystem rather than on the fact the cars are electric since every car is now electric.

This is very true its the unintended consequences of engineering that cause the most harm and are most often covered up. I always think of the example of the hand dryer that can't detect black peoples hands and how easy it is for a non racist engineer to make a racism machine. AI safety putting its focus on the what if it decides to do a genocide is kind of silly, its like worrying about nukes while you give out assault riffles and napalm to kids.

Strangely I think Ilya comes out of this well. He made a decision based on his values and what he believed was the best decision for AI safety. After seeing the outcome of that decision he changed his mind and owned that. He must have known it would result in the internet ridiculing him for flip flopping, but acted in what he thought was the best interest for the employees signing the letter. His actions are wroth criticism but I think his moral character has been demonstrated.

The other members of the board seemed to make their decision based on more personal reasons that seems to fit with Adams conflict of interest. They refused to communicate and only now accept any sort of responsibility for their actions and lack of plan.

Honestly Ilya is the only one of the 4 I would actually want still on the board. I think we need people who are willing to change direction based on new information especially in leadership positions despite it being messy, the world is messy.

Its not a private company it is a non profit working in the public interest this usually requires some sort of public accountability. The board want to be a public good when they make decisions but want to be a private entity when those decisions are criticised by the public.

Yea its a bit much he obviously doesn't deserve the admiration that he is getting. That said he deserves respect for helping bring ChatGPT to market, he deserves support because the board have acted like clowns and justified it with their mission of public accountability, but have rejected the idea that the board itself should be publicly accountable.

Keeping D'Angelo on the board is an obvious mistake, he has too much conflicting interest to be level headed and has demonstrated that. The only people that benefited from all this are Microsoft and D'Angelo. Give it a year and we will see part 2 of all this.

Further where is the public accountability? I thought the board was to act in the interests of the public but they haven't communicated anything. Are we all just supposed to pretend this never happend and that the board will now act in the public interest?

We need regulations to hold these boards which hold so much power accountable to the public. No reasonable AI regulations can be made until the public are included in a meaningful way, anyone that pushes for regulations without the public is just trying to control the industry and establish a monopoly.

new CEO grabbing bull by the balls, reassuring employees and partners and leading away from the path of Sam

I mean they did that and then fired her like 24 hours later. I think the board just looks massively incompetent because they are. Even if them firing Sam was fair, they handled it and the aftermath with a complete lack of communication or a plan. It demonstrates on its own that they are not up to the task of ensuring public transparency and accountability. I wouldn't want them overseeing a piss up at a brewery never mind skynet.

Given that Sam has since joined Microsoft, that seems plausible, on its face.

He is the biggest name in ai what was he supposed to do after getting fired? His only options with the resources to do AI are big money, or unemployment?

It seems plausible to me that if the not for profits concern was comercialisation then there was really nothing that the comercial side could do to appease this concern besides die. The board wants rid of all employes and to kill off any potential business, they have the power and right to do that and looks like they are.

AI truely is just a marketing term.

Spend half an hour making a simple demo.

Film it 100 times until you get a passable result.

Post on twitter "Oh WOW AI!?! GUYS AI!"

Pick up your VC check.

Every ones story is the same, buy in at the hype then sell when the price craters or maybe you are smart and decide to hoddl until the price has been hyped up but by then you lost your wallet / password oops.

Covid

The real question is did they do it with a java applet?

Every one in the uk is a Terrorist according to the Terrorism Act. We really do live in a police state here. This isn't anything new ither this has been going on for nearly 20 years now since they first implemented it with the promise they wouldn't use it to harrass protestors it was the first thing they did.

The voting public have no interest in freedom.

I got into the big leagues.

You sure about that? I know thats what every one says but lets face it, being a dev at FAANG is like being a chef at McDonald's. It sounds like you are taking it seriously and really trying to make your lifes best work, I bet your boss hates you and wishes you would just make the big mac as instructed.

Your mindset is trigger by your environment, change your environment the mindset will change without any effort. Trying to change your mindset in an enviornment that triggers a complacent mindset will drive you mad please don't try.

Get a job where your enthusiasim is appreciated and encouraged, stop trying to make soufflé at McDonald's.

Humans are the only thing capable of reasoning, AI isn't capable of it and its very rare that an animal other than a human is capable of even the most basic reasoning.

Animals act on instinct that is hard coded based on the probability of survival AI essentially does the same thing it follows hardcoded probabilities not reason.

Look at ukraine russian weapons are not worth the money and every military has known this for years. The only countries buying russian weapons are the ones that can't buy from the west.

I don't think its a bad thing that the rest of the world has weapons that can't compete with the west, as a westerner I think this is a good thing.

What happens when the news paper just makes stuff up because they need a more click baity article? People click links on emails without verifying the sender what makes you think readers will track back through the chain you describe to verify anything?

Don't roll your own authentication.

OP could easily get away with spewing every detail right here without getting caught,

The UK govenrment monitors UK citizens internet people have already been prossecuted simply for having knowledge of this court case which in the UK is illegal. The fear of surveillance doesn't stop her the reality of the government survaling people and then acting on it does.

Its ilegal to talk about the trial or the people involved in the uk because it is sealed.

One might imagine but so far it has failed to happen in all of human history. The powerful never give up their power.

The court houses are public to provide transparency to the public locking that away for 5 years does not provide transparency. I can't use that information when voting if the information is sealed until years after the next election.

Yes I used to do this for US customers when Hetzner and OVH would only take EU customers.

The problem is that the customers interested in that price point are trash customers that only wan't to do all the dodgey stuff hetzner doesn't want them to do. Hetzner will detected it and will firewall the whole server all sites will go down the bad and the good and all of your customers will want refunds even if they where the cause of the problems.

Bad business not worth it.

Hetzner do scan their networks for open proxies, spam mailing etc. They are supper aggressive on copyright too, as in you can just email them claiming an ip hosts copy right material and they will by default firewall that ip until the server owner responds.

I know this because I used to host a paste bin with them and they would constantly block my ip because people would post links to other sites that had copyright material. I didn't host anything illegal all you could post was 1mb of text. Hetzner would show me the copy right claim and it was always from some random hotmail address, the urls of the infringing material don't resolve to my ip and very clearly had nothing to do with me. Hetzner didn't care they blocked all of my servers until I had resolved the dmca request.

I had to stop using Hetzner because their blocking was too aggressive and I wasn't doing anything illegal anyway. Maybe this is self fulfilling as I would never use them for anything important after that experience, I can't risk them taking down production simply because some one with a hotmail account asked them too.

I would go so far as to say we've gone backwards in a big way.

I would say you probably just don't remember how bad VB was. As a language its extremely simple and misses most of the modern niceties we take for granted, no iterators, no maps, no anonymous functions, no multidimensional arrays, no objects, the list goes on.

I remember when I moved from Basic to VB the single most impressive thing was that it AUTOMATICALLY KNEW THE LINE NUMBERS! YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO WRITE THEM ON EVERY LINE! If you made a mistake IT COULD JUST TELL YOU THE ERROR, no more looking up codes on a table in the back of a book.

Basic was never supposed to be good to use it was only ever supposed to be easy to learn.

Its like people are just trying to trigger me today. Windows has IE and edge, safari is just a slower more buggy version of that. I don't care if the js engine is 50% faster if its dom implementation doesn't follow any standard and the rendering engine is 200% slower.

If people cared about any of the above they would use edge not chrome and firefox, people care about stability and compaitibility.

People think every one shares the same definition for words like a dictionary, but people don't learn words from the dictionary they learn them from context of other peoples speech.

The fact that context is communication seems to be lost on most people and in an effort to be efficient assume every one else is using and understands their definition.

The examples you give could all be caused by this. They could be trying to establish context or gain understanding of definitions. As in they are talking in an attempt to understand you rather than answer the question.

Is clear communication answering in the least words possible or covering all possible interpretations of understanding? Annoyingly its both.