jungturk

Because that ignores the reason the dialog exists in the first place - if the developer has bad intentions, they aren't going to mind lying in that text string.

Lots of licensed solutions have this (typically SAST or DAST tooling like Snyk, etc...). Given your build manifest/SBOM they cross-reference CVEs for vulnerabilities during/after build time.

Some have free licenses, many don't.

Homekit (and the Home iOS app) work just fine with HomeAssistant and most consumer-grade smart home devices (with a focus on Matter).

This device (being a Matter hub) doesn't change any of that.

The fact that they're partnering with select companies on producing sanctioned devices also doesn't change any of that.

Battacharya's The Man From the Future is an entertaining read (on JvN's life and achievements)

"because they're supposed to" isn't a meaningful statement who is doing the supposing here? is this just an appeal to intelligent design?

If you substitute "clinging" for "craving" (Burbea's Seeing that Frees expounds on this very clearly) then I think we get a better English interpretation of the material.

If the mind's full of clinging (either in demanding what isn't present or refusing to release what was present but which is now leaving the present) then that mind doesn't have any room left to experience aliveness.

So (to me) the material doesn't suggest asceticism or abandoning the human sensual potential, it reminds that clinging will sneak in and take over the mental cycles, undermining your ability to live to that potential.

I read it as less about individuals and more about cultural norms (and definitely less about choice and more about necessity). Cultures that invest their resources inward may find themselves subsumed by those that invest their resources on conquest given how power accumulates.

Costco sells fresh food (produce, meats, baked goods) and quite a bit of prepared-on-site ready-to-eat deli choices (soups, salads, tacos, etc...).

While sold in larger packages, they don't last any longer and so must be bought frequently.

Setting aside that we're living in a universe that's full of (practically) deterministic processes built over probabilistic components (and which behave sufficiently reliably without any human in the loop), I think the specific failure mode you're citing is that there aren't enough gates and constraints applied to the processes you've seen.

LLMs can contribute quite reliably given very narrow prompts and short horizons (keeping turns low and context brief). If you chain a bunch of these narrow contributions together and define guardrails (structured outputs, online evals, other-llm-as-judge/jury, etc...) you can produce a very repeatable workflow that reliably delivers to defined service levels.

The obvious issue being - you've got to define the workflow and implement all the guardrails, not hope that the LLM will infer them during a session or a one-shot prompt.

Wouldn't your claim be consistent with the Pope's request? Why would he be unhappy about that?

> Also I like credit cards for the rewards, cash back or especially travel points. But also things like extended warranty coverage and other perks.

Much of this is funded by inflated interchange fees paid by merchants (and thus inflating the cost of goods for everyone). Ideally you would just pay for the added value you see (fraud protection, charge disputes, supplemental insurance) rather than those costs being externalized to other buyers.

"Serving ads" is just the commercial application. All of the infrastructure used to harness (coordinate? co-opt?) the attention of the many and direct it toward some desired aims will surely end up being a tremendously transformative social capability.

Hard to see the upside for humanity as we've understood it to date, but its definitely going to be more impactful than just making a buck.

I think we literally have those agents today, albeit implemented in meat rather than silicon. Any particular reason you elect not to use the free-to-you travel agent? Generally they are the same or less expensive and able to work in your best interests.

Nah - Poincare & Lorentz did quite a bit of groundwork on relativity and its implications before Einstein put it all together.