I think your comment works as a reply to claiming closed source is more secure than open source - you try to bring them both to the same level.
I dont think it replies to what the user asks though. It seems reasonable expecting widely used open source software to be studied by many people. If thats true it would be good to question why this wasnt caught by anyone. Ignoring all ssl errors is not something you need to be an expert to know is bad...
It very much is our problem what he does with/on Twitter because it affects us, it's one of the largest social media platforms, it's not a new yacht he bought.
One of the valuable aspects of freedom of speech is ideas can gain traction because of their virtue and not e.g because of force. Musk has no expertise in most of what he talks about. Yet he uses reach he has purely because of his wealth to spread misinformation. The marketplace of ideas is a complete joke if ideas spread just because of money.
The second point is just confused. It isn't about if people would do it, it's on if Musk should be doing it. His antics include boosting misinformation like vaccine skepticism and fringe political theories, that's obviously wrong and worth criticizing.
That isn't at all true for Mastodon. Despite a very significant drop a while after the influx from twitter, looking at a few different sources it has twice as many monthly active users now (~600k before influx to hovering around ~1.2M for a few months now after the slump.)
The largest instances have a little duplication so there are something like 3 large gaming-related communities, 3 large world news communities, etc. This is not generally the case, for many topics communities on particular instances either "win out" so to speak in terms of subscribers or duplication doesn't exist.
The author is aware of that, mentions it towards the end:
> Most of Reddit’s current data has been scraped anyway, so the game is to protect Reddit’s data going forward.
But yes, Pushshift archives of all posts and comments until the recent ban [1] are freely available for download [2]
[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/pushshift/comments/135tdl2/a_respon... The ban was followed by allowing the parent non-profit of Pushshift (Network Contagion Research Institute) to use the API provided access is restricted to a use-case Reddit has care for: mod tools. Reddit hasnt replaced those with its own just yet. The rest of us are shut out.
On Linux you can prevent being ptrace'd or having your core dumped by setting PR_SET_DUMPABLE in prctl. I've seen this used in places you'd expect like ssh-agent and GNOME's Keyring password manager.
No, people don't reject child marriages just because they don't like it, it is medically known to be harmful and children can't consent.
Further, moral relativism is a dangerous and absurd position to hold. It might be convenient in excusing something you hold that's controversial but it also means a group of people can use it to defend any position at all they have. Any familiarity with what we humans have done and do should tell you this won't be about excusing disagreements over irrelevant things like ice-cream flavors.
I've expressed this badly. By "but not what I wanted" I don't mean it suggesting an alternative. I mean it giving an answer claiming to do what I asked for, but which doesn't actually. I would not be able to catch this. I hope this clarifies why I gave that as an example to my uncertainty of ChatGPT giving wrong answers.
On stackoverflow and the like you will know that the question does not apply to you.
Errors like suggesting incompatible combinations of parameters or hallucinated non-existant params you will easily catch once you try them. But what about more subtle conceptual misunderstandings?
I meant cases like asking how to X and ChatGPT suggesting something similar (and valid) but not what I wanted. Or imagine silent failures like an additional switch that happens to exclude what you wanted.
Not an issue if youre just automating grunt work you know to do yourself of course. But I'm interested in when you arent familiar with a tool.
Why not just google it? Theres always a blog or stackoverflow question to copy snippets from.
What keeps me away is that unless youre already familiar with a topic you wont catch errors. The command it suggests might not do exactly what you wanted.
Breaking the walled garden would cost them. E.g wouldnt it mean allowing people to interact with twitter without using the official apps, meaning losing ad revenue? (Obviously why third-party apps were banned)
It's much more likely it just wasn't something you encountered in your practice and not that reliable sources analyzing American political and financial support for Israel all happen to make up the part Evangelical Americans play. A quick search for e.g lobbying for Israel in the United States brings up credible sources.
You use "guided". It still guides the largest religion and another important one. Even though it does give insight to its historical context, it is much more than an artifact. Criticism of its morals are still relavant.
Probably because while some data has been open-sourced, there isn't any statement on what other data be open-sourced, or a comittment to it by Google. Voice data hasn't been open-sourced.
Mozilla on the other hand is a non-profit which will release the result of your labor under a very permissible license.
I dont think it replies to what the user asks though. It seems reasonable expecting widely used open source software to be studied by many people. If thats true it would be good to question why this wasnt caught by anyone. Ignoring all ssl errors is not something you need to be an expert to know is bad...