ameliaquining

This took place in 2005, nearly a decade before Medicaid expansion went into effect.

And so it comes full circle.

Why would the government use local LLMs? Compute is a central example of the kind of thing that makes sense to outsource.

...no? Whatever value they got from inference they already did is still there? Of course the government still needs to worry about vendor lock-in, but they'd have to do that no matter what, and also general-purpose LLMs are relatively replaceable for most use cases.

That's an argument against any descriptive name at all.

I don't understand this question, sorry.

But some organization has to check all that stuff, confirm that it's accurate, and then issue the certificate, right? So what's lost from having that organization just have a website that maps that information to domain names?

Can you give a concrete example of the kind of claim you think QWACs would be useful for verifying, that can't be addressed just as well with existing protocols?

Why do agents need any of this cryptographic infrastructure? Can't they just check on the certifying authority's website whether an entity is legitimate?

I think most American tech people are against most of those things? Why would they not have careers without them?

I've usually heard it called "ASP.NET MVC" except when the former part was clear from context.

The browser vendors, I think, were at least making a good-faith attempt to address a real security problem; it's not like they made any money from EV certificates. Even if it was inevitably going to be marketed somewhat predatorily, and ultimately didn't work out.