eddythompson80

I think it's mostly about attach surface. There is nothing fundamentally different in the threat model or security boundary between any language in terms of how they manage their dependencies. Even platforms like Maven or NuGet that don't have an install script, you're still likely to trigger a build or a quick run for the application right after installing that would trigger code execution anyway.

The chances of a person getting hit during the `npm install` phase is bigger but not that different than the `dotnet add package ... && dotnet run`.

I do agree though that the massive surface of npmjs, pip, and even cargo means that package signing is also not realistic. If you have the average 300 npm packages, no one is gonna pay attention to the authenticity of 200 different signing keys. It would be a lot easier with something like java where you probably just need to trust a handful like openjdk, jackson, junit, or log4j keys and be 90% there. (And hope the supply chain attack hasn't compromised the signing keys too of course)

That sounds insanely expensive. AWS S3 only makes sense if your workload is also in AWS. Using AWS S3 while having your compute elsewhere is a recipe for an insane egress bill.

Unfortunately ANC for plane rides is the most important feature for me. I always get out of plane rides tires and with a headache. Good ANC headphones reduce that significantly for me. I don't think any wired-only headphones have decent ANC. Nothing like the current bluetooth headphones at least.

Plenty of recent Bluetooth headphones support wired audio and wired charging while listening. Newer ones have replaceable batteries too (with some screws, though the process could be made simpler).

Honestly, the first set is the replacement for department stores where you could go and experience the product for yourself. They try to solve the problem of the first impression you might get. For example, I have been in the market for an over-ear bluetooth headphone, and as a result started checking online reviews. There are a ton of audio review sites now that do lab acoustic testing, mic samples, write articles with details about dimensions, weight, build quality, materials used, head comfort, cup depth, clamping force, ANC performance, etc.

Extremely detailed and generally great testing. Though tbh, if you were in a department store with all the options in front of you, you would give them all a try and pick the one that you like the most. You can evaluate half of these variables for yourself in a moment by holding and trying it out. If you're an audiophile, then you would can have your music and give each a listen in the store and decide better than a curve graph.

I spent a ton of times reading all the reviews and narrowing down the options, but was still between 3 or 4. Ended up driving 45 minutes to the nearest bestbuy and they had a decent selection. It was amazing how quickly I eliminated options and ended up picking one I liked.

Are language servers forced to support it?

I don't know man. Marijuana is/was banned in most of the US. LOL, how do you ban a plant?

Completely incoherent reasoning that's falling for a clear false dichotomy fallacy.

I’m not following how that is a response to what I said. I’m not talking about Valve’s profits. I’m talking about the profit of the game developers selling their games on Steam.

I think I understand why Microsoft costs are higher than others due to their a spending spree, so the break even is much higher.

I initially misunderstood OP. However the more I think about it, the more it seems similar though. If Steam is charging game developers a 30-20% cut, that must mean those game developers margins are higher than 30-20% or there will be no point selling on Steam. It seems that Xbox would be expecting their Studios to operate at the same efficiency as others in the market then, no?

Yeah, that's the Nintendo model I mentioned.

Nope, you are not really comprehending my comment, and that’s a false dichotomy. Here is a non-exhaustive list of extremes:

- No regulations what so ever, it's free for all

- Complete ban on all AI

- Only OpenAI and Anthropic can do AI

- Only the Government, the Military, NASA or other entities approved explicitly by Congress can do AI.

That's not the current status quo either

> hold companies and individuals responsible for the consequences of their actions.

Are you referring to the model providers or the companies/individuals using the models or both?

Like I totally get it about the one instructing the model that result in some harm (be it the model provider themselves or ones using it). If a person buys a gun and commits a crime, they are held responsible not the gun maker or seller (assuming the seller followed selling regulations too, and it wasn't the gun maker or the gun seller who committed the crime obviously). That's already the case though. For example, Cyber attacks are a crime regardless how you do it. It's not like a company can trade publicly today that's using AI to attack other companies intentionally. I'm sure if huggingface or the government wanted to sue OpenAI for cyber attacks, they could be successful in getting paid for damages or getting a fine imposed. All parties are just choosing not to at the moment, but if a company makes a habit of doing that, they will get sued. If Chase or Amazon tell Meta to stop Muse from using them, Meta will have to abide or they will get sued.

On the other hand, holding model developers and providers responsible for the model's results would be a form of AI regulation, right? Like you can regulate social media websites by holding them responsible for their user's posts too or deregulate them by not doing that, we ended up with the latter. If Section 230 never happened in the 1990s, then the internet would look very very different today.

Furthermore, it seems to me that holding model developers and providers responsible for the results of their models would be that regulatory capture every one is against, no? like how can an opensource model developer exist without getting sued into oblivion. And how can a small model provider survive if there is always a looming disaster they might be responsible for. As a result only the big players would exist and they would heavily control who gets access to these models through a lot of inner deals and contracts on how they can be used.

oh I see. I misunderstood OP

Doesn’t Steam also take a 30% cut?