Wand blender don't make things hot enough to cook, so OP is indeed using raw eggs in their ice cream. Which is probably fine, it just means their ice cream isn't using a cooked custard base.
> Some markdown flavors for example use \(\), which is probably the worst of them to use.
Some markdown flavors say they use `\(\)` but they also use `\` as the escape character, so in practice you have to use `\\(\\)` which is definitely the worst.
> UB was coined only in the first C standard, in 1989. Prior to that there was no "If you do this, anything can happen".
I.e., the context is, before UB existed as a concept, how would these things be categorized. And I was trying to offer the correction that, before UB existed, it wasn't "all behavior is defined" but rather many behaviors depend on your particular local environment. While that may technically be implementation defined, the current standard requires that implementation defined be documented, and UB-like edge cases were most definitely not documented anywhere consistently in the old days!
They'll qualify their answers in English but as the article mentions, if your prompt asks for a confidence score, that "uncertainty" doesn't translate into low numerical confidence.
If my compiler "went down" I could still think through the problem I was trying to solve, maybe even work out the code on paper. I could reach a point where I would be fairly confident that I had the problem solved, even though I lacked the ability to actually implement the solution.
If my LLM goes down, I have nothing. I guess I could imagine prompts that might get it to do what I want, but there's no guarantee that those would work once it's available again. No amount of thought on my part will get me any closer to the solution, if I'm relying on the LLM as my "compiler".
> An interesting side effect might be that only people locked out from using LLMs will learn how to program in the future, as vide coding doesn't teach you the fundamentals.
While thinking about/working with LLMs, I've been reminded more than once of Asimov's short story Profession (http://employees.oneonta.edu/blechmjb/JBpages/m360/Professio...). In it, no one goes to school: information is just dumped into your brain. You get an initial dump of the basics when you're a kid, and then later all the specialty information for your career (which is chosen for you, based on what your brain layout is most suited to).
The protagonist is one of a number of people who can't get the second dump; his brain just isn't wired right, so he's sent to a Home for the Feeble Minded to be with other people who have to learn the old-fashioned way.
Through various adventures he eventually realizes that everyone who was "taped" is incapable of learning new material at all. His Home for the Feeble Minded is in fact an Institute of Higher Studies, one of only a handful, which are responsible for all the invention and creation that sustains human progress.
> On a phone keyboard, sure, it's as hard as an accent sign (á, for example), difficult but not twrrible. But on a keyboard? Yeah, no one is typing in Alt combos when literally any other construction will do.
For me, --- gets converted to an em-dash (—) while typing, if I have my input method (ELatin) enabled. I'm so used to typing in while working in LaTeX I can easily slip it in elsewhere.
Correct; the ability of a model to reproduce source material verbatim does not necessarily make the model's existence illegal. However, using a model to do just that might very well present a legal liability for the user. I would be interested to see the extent to which models can "recite from memory" source code, e.g., from the various MS code leaks. Put another way, if I'm using LLM code generation extensively, do I need to run a filter on its output to ensure that I don't "accidentally" copy large chunks of the Windows codebase?
I wonder why that would be? Presumably if the batteries are low then the pressure the machine "thinks" it's inflated the cuffs to is higher than the actual pressure...
I miss TkDesk, which I discovered many years ago when I was first trying Linux, partly because it supports unlimited splits, not just two. In fact, if I'm remembering correctly, when navigating to a subdirectory the default was just to open it in a new split. You ended up with splits containing the full path from wherever you started to your eventual subdirectory (you could scroll the view of splits horizontally once there got to be too many).
This also lets you run QEMU over SSH, if you want. I use this in my assembly language course; towards the end I give an assignment to write Hello, World! as a 16-bit real mode MBR bootloader. Students can do the whole thing on our SSH server, including testing in QEMU (and even attaching GDB to it to debug) not needing to install anything locally.
Maybe that's why the models are so eager to spit out reams and reams of code, it lets their masters claim a higher percentage (even if most of the code they emit is never used).
My wife and I agreed to expunge "just" from our vocabulary, at least with regards to asking to do this. It's almost always kind of belittling, implying that the thing you're asking for is easy and obvious, and you're an idiot/lazy for either not doing it already or trying to explain why its more difficult that it looks.
https://www.seriouseats.com/best-immersion-blenders
Wand blender don't make things hot enough to cook, so OP is indeed using raw eggs in their ice cream. Which is probably fine, it just means their ice cream isn't using a cooked custard base.