blochist

This is untrue and if you thought about what you're claiming for a second this should be obvious. The MIT license let's someone do any of the things outlined there subject only to the need to retain the copyright notice and the license itself. I can grab MIT-licensed files and commit them to my repo (e.g., vendoring a dependency). I can also grab the files from an MIT-licensed commit and then the files from the next commit and recreate the history of that repo with myself as the author provided I've met those two conditions. I'm not saying this isn't _scummy_ behavior; it is! But its within the bounds of what the MIT license allows.

Nothing in the post you're replying to is about "is 2000 passkeys storable", it's about "if I have 2000 passkeys and I need to move between an Apple device and an Android device, do I need to establish a second set of 2000 passkeys"?

In fact, you should expect capitalism to exploit your addiction problems in pursuit of profit. That's what it does...

Well, also just looking at the first page, while I think there are analogous circumstances where this would've been infuriating (e.g., the government executes an unrelated search warrant, discovers both marijuana and the gun and charges him with it), in this case, it seems as though he both surrendered the gun to them and freely admitted to using marijuana which he also directed them to. That said, the search warrant was related to terrorism and it's very likely it would've authorized the agents to search for any drugs and firearms or other weapons.

SOC2 is, at the end of the day, a voluntary compliance standard. HIPAA and FERPA requirements are federal law. Waiving those requirements would not just mean accepting additional liability, but would normally make your customer ineligible to receive federal funds, which are typically a substantial chunk of revenue.

It's an excellent comment on the attitude behind the question and this is, after all, a comment section not an "answers" section.

Aside from the fact that it kind of obviously is if you "vote" the fact that it says "Not sure yet? That's okay — vote anyway!" is kind of a give-away that this isn't going to produce anything like rigorously useful data on the question (it produces a lot of other data though!)

Usually "unilateral amendments" are allowed via the contract terms, so it's part of the original contract.

Importantly, though, the token is "\\xadder" which looks a bit like an escaped hex code. That actually suggests a different origin of the token. `\xad` is the Unicode soft-hyphen (U+00AD). The soft hyphen is used to suggest where it makes sense to hyphenate a word if a line-break is needed. This shows up fairly frequently (2.9k occurrences) on GitHub in web-scraping datasets, which suggests that a model trained on data scraped from the web might see a fair number of these.

Basically, OpenAI is trained on web data that has a number of words where splitting on -der makes sense (e.g., mur-der, un-derstanding, won-derful; although the most common occurrence in a GitHub search for "\\xadder" is what appears to be an incorrectly encoded string "L\xc3\xadder", probably from the Portuguese and Spanish "Lí-der").

Anyways, using the o200k tokenizer `mur\xadder` yields two tokens (88762 and 179582). 88762 encodes "mur" and 179582 encodes "\xadder".

And where in the Constitution do we find this notion of "rights of citizens". The Constitution governs how the federal government is allowed to act and the powers it has been given (by the states and people).