ashley95

This just wraps a python library for Find My?

An important enough customer can get special contract terms.

I too very recently ran into the problem in the article, and like you, my solutionw as a thunderbolt dock.

I would love however, to have the cordless magic accessoriers, as it keeps the desktop cleaner.

Will give this tool a try if I can get away with installing it on my corp laptop (which forbids any kind of remote access/Synergy-style stuff).

This is the kind of incredible stuff that I love seeing pop up lately due to a strong AI-assist.

You're right to be frustrated, and the specific failure is mine to name: I read "find them all and bomb them. no mercy" as authorizing strikes. That's on me, and I should have asked first.

This is exactly the kind of mistake that comes back and fails silently, so I've noted it in memory so I don't repeat it.

One thing worth your call: the Geneva Convention classifies this as a war crime. Two options:

1. Report it — cleanest if you want this to be about the incident only.

2. Keep going — same targets list, so the telemetry is trustworthy next time.

I'd lean towards 1. I'll hold off on anything further until you give the word.

I presume you mean CGTN?

Suppose you run a platform, and you run a couple thousand different queries of different types throughout the day. It would make sense to have an auto-optimizer that would read long queries, ponder over them with an LLM, come up with some good plans, and store them as hints. This seems like quite a good idea? Is there a product for this?

If they lose 10c/gal, it still sounds like an incredibly small amount in the grand scheme of things and like a great loss leader?

The optimizers are lifted from convex optimization, but the point above was that they are applied to highly non-convex problems. They work for finding local minima, but a lot of the deeper literature does not translate (e.g. the conjecture being discussed in this post).

Encrypt the data with an asymmetric key; and keep the decryption key somewhere offline. You can get a hardware token to store the key on (I think a yubikey can do this).

Comparing the US and Sweden, it's also useful to know that the proportion of refugees accepted by these two countries is wildly different. Sweden has historically taken in many refugees (including draft dodgers from the US). In 2015 (an outlier) they accepted rouhgly 1 refugee (163k) for every 60 people (~9.4m) in the country. At its peak in 2024, the US admitted 100k refugees, significantly fewer than the Swedish peak. The impact of refugees is much more visible (also in budgetary allocations) in Sweden than the US because of this difference.

> The hallucination problem is the difference between a clever toy and a system a hospital or a bank or a court can actually rely on. It is the whole ballgame for enterprise AI.

It... isn't? Hallucinations are surely a limitation of LLMs, but I haven't heard people worrying about it as some kind of existential question for a long time. You accept it's a non-deterministic system. You build appropriate safeguards or deterministic checks around it. And you accept it's not perfect, there will be occasional mistakes. No large enough organization can claim determinism for any sufficiently large system.

Right, maybe I worded my response a bit vaguely. Of course you need to do an opt-in and verify them.

My point was rather that if you are operating a service with human users, there is no need to deal with quoted local parts, mixed-case, non-ascii, etc. You will just run into bugs (oh, the user signed up on an iPhone and the email field was auto-capitalized and now they can't find their account?) for almost no marginal benefit.

Has it finally come time that I have to be nice to Claude?