jimbob21

Likewise, perfectionism when it is unneeded can slow teams down to a halt for no reason. The balance in most cases is in the middle, and should shift towards 100% correctness as consequences get more dire.

This is not to say your code should be a buggy mess, but 98% bug free when you're a SaaS product and pushing features is certainly better than 100% bug free and losing ground to competitors.

Why would package be used as the standard? What person fully leveraging AI is going to put up packages for release? They (their AI model) write the code to leverage it themselves. There is no reason to take on the maintenance of a public package just because you have AI now. If anything, packages are a net drag on new AI productivity because then you'd have to worry about breaking changes, etc. As far as actual apps being built by AI, the same indie hackers that had garbage codebases that worked well enough for them to print money are just moving even faster. There are plenty of stories about that.

Actually, it does, at least for this case. The judge just said so.

They clearly were being digitized, but I think its a more philosophical discussion that we're only banging our heads against for the first time to say whether or not it is fair use.

Simply, if the models can think then it is no different than a person reading many books and building something new from their learnings. Digitization is just memory. If the models cannot think then it is meaningless digital regurgitation and plagiarism, not to mention breach of copyright.

The quotes "consistent with copyright's purpose in enabling creativity and fostering scientific progress." and "Like any reader aspiring to be a writer" say, from what I can tell, that the judge has legally ruled the model can think as a human does, and therefore has the legal protections afforded to "creatives."

How can gold exist without a state to insure its value?

Simple: demand.

And her summary is literally a list of corporate buzzwords

How is more thoroughly understanding an important service pure waste? I could agree with inefficient, but definitely not pure waste.

You've just described a technical director, so it is no surprise that he was promoted.

I am surprised that this was surprising to people. Cars are much bigger than people, of course you'd need bigger parking lots than seating space

Wow you are uninformed.

>The value of the tokens is completely and totally dependent on a consensus of crypto miners doing their job within the parameters of the system, assuming you want them to maintain a price and trading volume that's favorable to the token holders.

Number of miners has absolutely nothing to do with trading volumes, not sure where you got that from. Miners don't maintain a price any more than a whale maintains a price.

>If the majority of miners suddenly go bust due to outside circumstances

The rest of the miners would step in and start making more money, actually.

>they decide to conspire together and attack the system, or conspire with some whales to perform a rug pull

Not much of a rug pull to sell the tokens you've legitimately acquired through mining or fiat buying. That's just selling. High volatility selling, yes, but still just selling.

>it's extremely likely that your tokens aren't going to be worth anything anymore. This applies to every token, including bitcoin.

Oh yes, Bitcoin has died thousands of times. Maybe you'll be right one day, but I doubt it.

Did you later call and ask the officer if that was the exact second he decided you will get a ticket? Or were you merely persuaded by her saying that was what happened?

I'm not the person you're responding to, but yes I would argue academia is not the real world i.e. private sector companies. Its academia. There are a whole different set of rules because it is not a privately run for-profit company. And nothing ever happens specifically because that's absolutely par for the course in academia. There's a whole different culture there.

I would guess some sort of onomatopoeia, but I couldn't guess what its trying to imitate. Maybe an uncommon spelling of "pfft?"

> The megaphone of lies convinces stupid people who have the right to vote. It’s clear they don’t have the intellect to vote responsibly, and that can be attributed to Facebook and Twitter letting any miscreant or moron ingest intellectual poison.

So instead of letting stupid people vote, you would prefer that their vote is manipulated and therefore cast for them? You would prefer a fascist state?