I’m a bit surprised this is possible in the first place. I get that you might not be able to upload everything in one go, but it feels like you should “start” and “finish” a release in that case, and once it’s finished you can’t modify it.
I guess the use case is that you might want to build a wheel for an older release for a newer version of Python?
You could argue that if you allowed a harness, and that harness was specific for ARC, then you don’t have AGI, you have something that is definitely not general.
Stored procedures and SQL injection are orthogonal concerns. You can have a parameterized query using PREPARE without needing to resort to stored procedures, and many database drivers or wrappers help you with this by making you provide a string with something like $1 and then the values which are sanitized.
Stored procedures are useful in cases such as annoying data type conversions (for example, before the newer ltree versions, its path couldn't accept hyphens and so if you were using UUIDs you needed a way to convert the UUID to a ltree compatible representation) or when you want to write a function that is used by a constraint, but it's not something I would generally reach for and certainly not for SQL injection reasons.
This isn't about an academic issue though, and who would actually state their RSA key is mathematically sound except in the case that they're performing some research in the field? The point the parent was making was that it was obviously written by AI.
That's a fair point, maybe "city center" isn't the best term here. What I mean are areas still in the city close to where a lot of the cafes, bars, restaurants, nightlife - third places in general - are, which is where people that want to live in a city generally prefer to live in if possible.
Many cities and areas close to major European cities have good transit infrastructure, yet people don't want to live there, they want to live in the city. So making more housing outside of the city, again, doesn't solve the actual problem facing major European cities.
No, but they are don't rise nearly as much as real estate prices in city centers, and it's mostly irrelevant to the point I was making, because it doesn't matter how the prices are outside of the city center if you want to live in the city center.
Am I understanding that the solution proposed in the article is to allow more dense building in suburbs/outskirts of cities in Europe? This doesn't solve the actual problem that many European cities face, which is a housing shortage in the actual city center, where people want to live; there's generally not that much a lack of housing the further you get outside of a major city center in Europe, and people don't want to live outside of the city center because, well, they want to be in the city.
Can you provide some evidence that it didn’t work in Australia? Given the ban hasn’t been in place that long I’d like to see your sources about it not working.
Having looked at many PDFs that needed to be “translated” to Markdown, it feels like a strange choice - I know it’s primarily to make things easily accessible to AI, but if we’re going to train models anyway, why not train them on something better? Markdown is quite limited, and can’t render something like a nested table for example, and if the point of having “open knowledge” is for AI, why do we need to use a format that won’t really be read by humans?
This doesn’t make any sense. We have more access to entertainment, be it comics, porn, or films, than any period in history, yet we continue to make more substantial scientific progress than any point in history.
I was about to comment something like this. Consumption from a VAT perspective doesn't increase linearly with wealth, so a more wealthy person isn't going to spend and get taxed via VAT 100x more than someone with 100x less wealth, and VAT affects the poor much more than the rich because it's a tax on consumption irrespective of wealth, so the poor pay a larger percentage of their wealth to VAT.
We should just get rid of VAT and replace the lost tax revenue with something that's more equitable, such as a proper wealth tax. It's not like wealth goes away with a UBI.
> California lawmakers are again considering A.B. 412, a bill that would require AI developers to identify and disclose copyrighted works used to train generative AI systems.
> The problem this year is the same as last year: it’s practically impossible to comply with this law. The bill demands information that often does not exist, and cannot realistically be obtained.
> Its definition of “developer” extends to anyone who makes a generative AI model available to Californians.
I get that this would burden up-and-coming companies that want to train new models, but in general I don't think it's a bad thing that a company needs to know where the material they train their model comes from, and know its copyright status, and if it's actually an impossible problem then maybe the whole system is unworkable. Assuming that model training isn't fundamentally considered fair use, how else can you approach this problem?
I guess the use case is that you might want to build a wheel for an older release for a newer version of Python?