I meant ‘make sense’ to mean ‘could rewrite without garbage’. Maybe I was wrong, anyway
Rust dev, I enjoy reading and playing games, I also usually like to spend time with friends.
You can reach me on mastodon @sukhmel@mastodon.online or telegram @sukhmel@tg
I meant ‘make sense’ to mean ‘could rewrite without garbage’. Maybe I was wrong, anyway
I’m afraid, LLMs are gone a bit further from the state when such ‘poisoning’ made sense.
I’m afraid that soon this may reach a point where it will be easier for LLM to make sense of the text, than for a human, if this idea gets further development.
once the tool no longer works, you
… try every trick to make it look like it works, blame everyone for not using it, blame everything for not working the way it should, break some things that are made with other tools that work for a good measure (it was their fault for being too arrogant, anyway)
Reminds me of one site that said I shouldn’t use ‘git secret’ because reasons. I’ve spent quite some time to find what do they propose to use instead (that wasn’t as straightforward as in this article), turns out they provide a ‘solution’ that includes their partners’ system to manage secrets. Another bullshit, in other words
You got me, I decided to read the article later (I hope to, at least). But your summary looks about right, I don’t really expect C++ to become much safer than it is now, which is not very much. Should take a look at profiles, I love a good laugh
Edit: looked up those ``profiles’', it looks like a vague and complicated proposal that will require an unrealistic amount of undertaking. But that might be seen as bring in the spirit of C++
Later: short summary of the conclusion of what the committee does (read 307 minutes)
It’s highly likely that china at least wants other countries to be dependent on themselves
I may prefer being dependent to being conquered by force
This is almost what I need for my ancient meme folder
Reasonable and viable ≠ RFC compliant
This quote summarises my views:
There is some danger that common usage and widespread sloppy coding will establish a de facto standard for e-mail addresses that is more restrictive than the recorded formal standard.
Don’t worry, this idea is likely too complicated
What’s the story? I think I never heard of that
Chernobyl
But that was a really old tech, the plants built after 1990s shouldn’t allow this scale of pollution even if all the stops are pulled and everything breaks in the worst way possible
This is the ideal rendition, I would say. On a related note, I just love it when there are backspaces in my filenames
There are many regexes that validate email, and they usually aren’t compliant with the RFC, there are some details in the very old answer on SO. So, better not validate and just send a confirmation, than restrict and lock people out, imo
That’s true, there’s even a party game that consists solely of controversial topics to talk about, not even this kind of weird ones
Also a spin-off where Trolley Man cures incurable patients one by one using sacrifices of 5
Living with knowing you did nothing to save 4 people may affect you as badly. To be fair, the person doing the choice is fucked up both ways, if ey is not a sociopath.
testing oneself with fun hypotheticals
fun
you’ve got a peculiar taste for fun, I must admit
to be fair, I don’t disagree, and discussing things like that or pondering them can be fun, but I still wouldn’t expect such a choice of words 😅
On a non-shitpost note
I’m amazed how things turn out sometimes:
I’m almost sure it was about the same way we got flat earth and sovereignty of citizens