Kind of normal I think, at the companies I've worked for, most outages were caused by a change in production, for which the impact was not properly assessed.
This could actually be extremely convenient to use in many parts of Africa where place simply do not have addresses. Right now what we do is latitude longitude, which works wonders but can a bit clunky especially in cities
I haven't read that book, but asked for a summary.
Honestly, I cannot see software being regulated the same way as food industry is, for the very simple reason that software can trivially cross borders (legally or not) while food cannot. Regulating that industry to prevent any progress by erecting bureaucratic barriers in a given country will just kill the industry in that country and make it thrive elsewhere where it's less regulated. As a result, the regulation-freak country will lose any of its competitive advantages due to lesser efficiency.
Doing this on a global scale requires "CFC-ban"-levels of global coordination which I cannot see happening in the world we live in today. Just look at how global CO2 reduction and climate change is being handled today at the global scale.
Really? It is up to them if they want to use what I wrote. Why would I get fined or jailed for not writing documentation? Good luck trying to prove any wrongdoing. If you want support feel free to hire me to do that, or just do it yourself, pretty much like big tech is doing right now with open source
A serious security issue indeed, if someone knows the hash.
How I manage this is that every time I want to open-source a previously private feature, I take the changeset diff and apply that to the files in the public repository. Same features, but plausibly different hash.
Transitioning from CentOS 7 to RedHat 8 and 9 at my former company's private cloud has smooth for most teams, pareto-style, with 80% of migration-related incidents caused by the 20% of the teams that did some really weird changes to the VM's OS that was no longer allowed under RHEL 8 or 9.
At first, I thought it was just to reduce the complexity of managing hardening rules for several OS and OS versions.
For the AI/Robot tax, the pessimistic view is that the legal state of the world is such that such tax can and will be evaded. Now not only the LLMs put humans out of a job because an LLM or a SD model mimicks their work, but the financial gains have now been hidden away in tax havens through tax evasion schemes designed by AIs. And even if through some counter-AIs we manage to funnel the financial gains back to the people, what is now the incentive for capital owners to invest and keep investing in cutting-edge AI, if the profits are now so meagre to justify the investment?
> Because a human has fundamental output limitations (parallel capacity, time, lifespan) and a machine does not.
Industrialization as we know it would have never happened if we artificially limit progress, just so that people could still have jobs. I guess you could hold the same kind of argument for the copists, when printing became widespread; for horses before the automobile; or telephone operators before switches got automated. Guess what they have become now. Art made by humans can still exist although its output will be marginal compared to AI-generated art.
LLMs are not humans but are used by humans. In the end the beneficiary is still a human.
Happened with GPT2, for which they didn't publish the model for several months, GPT3 and 4 whose models were also not published, but given to Microsoft before being published as ChatGPT. The latter being dumbed down further and further over time as jailbreak prompts are patched one after the other.
The ability to use the debugger for troubleshooting any unfamiliar code has drastically increased my confidence. Unfortunately I was not taught to use such tools while at university where we used to code on a daily basis.
Also, using state of the art IDEs to be able to navigate between my own and third-party code removed pretty much all of my anxiety when dealing with code in general.
For your first question, it's a stash at a walkable distance out of your residence. For fingerprints, wrap it up in a condom every time you fetch it. If you live in an apartment complex, store it out of your apartment at a place where people would never look thoroughly: the garbage room, for instance.
There should be a way to make the Tails OS in such a way that each time the USB is plugged in, the contents of the flash drive are moved to your computer RAM, so that if you plug it off without running `shutdown` explicitly, not only you'll shut the computer down in 2 seconds, but your USB is also clean. The `shutdown` command being run with the USB still plugged in then copies the image from RAM back to your thumb drive. Your non-destructive shutdown routine will obviously take a lot longer though.
Conspiration is 30 years maximum. Actually committing a terrorist act and being convicted locks you up for good in a supermax prison. So yeah either way you're locked up for a VERY long time :/
People convicted for Jan 6 Capitol attacks are looking at 18 years[1] at least
While that won't erase what the accused have gone through during 16 months(!) of detention, I think it's still good news to see that the State has been condemned for its actions.
The "proofs" for conspiracy were apparently very light and the fact that the accused had used privacy protection measures, like instructions for a de-Google'd smartphone, Tails, TOR and encryption, were apparently enough to sue, detain and to have the DGSI investigate... I wonder what would happen if a similar case happens in the U.S.: they would have perhaps been suggested to have a plea bargain and plead guilty and serve X years in prison, and maybe liberated after Y years for good conduct. But, oh wait, being convicted of terrorism actually sentences you to 30 years[1] in the U.S. so you'll most likely rot in a cell and be forgotten by everyone except your captors.
Impressive demonstration. Had I had the same set of tools just a few years back, maybe I'd have kept my old job a little longer.
Jokes aside, there is only so much complexity that can be held. Try writing a financial regulatory report from the data present in your enterprise ERP (whose schema you'll eventually have to feed prior or in addition to your prompt).
Granted you can also do it in small steps using only subsets of the whole schema, but that still requires non-trivial oversight by a human expert. Plus, user needs are not set in stone and are not exempt from contradictions. The human might challenge those contradictions, the machine will not.
Infinite-length context could address prompt size related issues, but hallucinations on imaginary columns and flat-out wrong calculations, which cannot be avoided by humans either, will happen past a certain point.
Anyway I am not sure any sensible CFO or Financial department manager would give results produced by an unauditable automated system that takes in English and spits out numbers on a spreadsheet: if errors are missed or bugs arise, who's responsible? (the AI _is_ the expert, remember)
3 years ago, I extensively used the all-company's shared filesystem to pass information between 2 independent Jenkins instances (One on Windows for jobs that worked best under a Windows machine and one on Redhat which was considered as the "main" instance); and between the Jenkins and target application servers (Windows and Redhat) which all had the company's filesystem mounted. It took time to perfect, but worked wonderfully once I adopted the rename-in-place technique as described by parent.
I wonder if the system is still in place. Last time I checked the Jenkins folder was occupying 270 GB (!) of the 10 TB shared FS, most likely because FS block size was 1 MB.
I think this is unfortunately what is going happen in the next few years as more tech companies will price their APIs out of reach of small businesses :/