vintagedave
Joined 10 years ago
Joined 10 years ago
It reminds me of that version of Linux that was used for automated gun targeting and firing, perhaps in the early 2000s. Authors gave away their code as open source, and then that open source was used for what many felt was an evil purpose. A path to something many disliked or opposed now included them and their actions, despite their good intentions.
It's a mildly horrific celebration, with its tradition of burning an effigy (Guy Fawkes.) The man himself was not executed by fire, but in the end by hanging, I think. Wikipedia has some unpleasant details of what was planned for him.
Yet today, effigies of other people are placed on the fire. I feel it is a relevant festival, in that unlike Halloween (spooky ghosts, commercial) it's a deeply political festival, the result of failed revolution. It's a celebration of the establishment winning, and yet somehow people see it more as a celebration of the attempt.
Anyone know what they're doing?
It sounds like a single processor, so no best-of-three or similar systems. Software solution only, possibly running on the same bitflipping CPU that's being checked. I'd be very interested to know how it's solved.
At home I sometimes find a dead spider fallen and trapped in a drinking glass. Since moving to the countryside, mice in winter have become a reality. Recently for kitchen repairs, I found several dead ones that had fallen into the cavity around our range hood, which was built apparently once, not made to be opened. Here I am, two thousand years later, experiencing in my kitchen something similar to those Romans in their wardrobe.
> Both the report and the Park’s press release invoke Tacitus and the rules for property left without heirs. The report adds that this reference needs philological and legal-historical study before it is tied to the owners of this house. The measure I could trace is in Suetonius, Life of Titus 8.4, which assigns the property of those who died at Vesuvius without heirs to restoring the buried towns.
'Restoring the buried towns' - what a wonderful idea, that Pompeii's treasures were, and by tradition and respect today are, used for the benefit of the site!
The press release, Google-Translate-d, has only speculation about what happened to the residents:
> But perhaps they didn't make it, and they could be among those who, as the historian Tacitus recalls, died without an heir, and whose assets were supposedly used for the refoundation of Pompeii, which ultimately never materialized.
...which is considerably less romantic than the thought that the artifacts and property would have have the ancient law respected today.
Are they forced to sell? To raise new capital? To increase value somehow (?) to show the debt can be met? I don't know enough to even know what questions to ask. Are they in trouble, I guess, as in, suppose they had to sell to cover debt, in this market, would anyone be around to buy?
Edit: the readme has something very similar:
wine based Win16->Win32 conversion codes:
BOOL16 WINAPI DestroyWindow16( HWND16 hwnd )
{
return DestroyWindow( WIN_Handle32(hwnd) );
}
I would guess that's what the WIN_Handle32 method/macro is doing.OpenAI, in theory, tries for GPT to be neutral. And, 'reality has a well-known liberal bias', as Colbert said.
I live somewhere pretty remote, and every article it suggests is an entry for a nearby village, which is usually a sentence long. There are other interesting things nearby: could it have some kind of variance function, so it looks specifically for a variety of content?
Here I am, seeing something cool and immediately asking for changes. Spirit of the internet ;) Genuinely, it is a wonderful idea, and I admire the concept and that you did it.
I think if redeploying was not possible, I would have preferred they automatically hid or revoked keys, or the sites or services were automatically turned offline. I suppose this may not be everyone's preference. I know for my site, a simple 'This is hosted by Railway and we have an outage' (and for our service tier, all REST service requests 500-ing, or 404-ing, or...) would be far preferable to the site being online, appearing to work, and functionality just failing for people due to the keys being revoked. Something clear is preferable to something hidden. I worry that to our users, who don't know our host, when the service is down but we cannot change the deployment, it makes us look like we're unreliable or flaky.
I like Railway but have been burned a little by them. FWIW, while not using them for one service where I felt really let down, one other service remained and just a week ago I recommended them again... ouch!
I feel they've grown fast but may not have the infrastructure fully fleshed out. A mass 'disable all services' button probably would not exist until the day they need one.
I thought both these statements were no longer held to be broadly true? At least in big lab or frontier models.
https://daveon.design or https://vintagedave.com