Have you tried using code generated by an LLM? It rarely runs at all until you fix it yourself.
It reminds me of how ezines would publish source codes to run exploits with slight errors so script kiddies couldn’t run them if they didn’t know how to fix them.
We’re talking about coding competitions here. These models have been fed the entirety of ACM, SPOJ, LeetCode, and whatever other competitions they can get their hands on. They are good at constrained coding competition tasks, and certainly strong enough to place highly in a competition meant for high school students.
> Have you tried using code generated by an LLM? It rarely runs at all until you fix it yourself.
In College Humor's Brennan's exasperated tone:
THEN WHAT ARE WE DOING!?
Like Jesus fuck. I feel insane. We scraped the internet, broke tons of trust in our community, fed tons of code we didn't ask for into an industrial shredder, and worked out nonsense generators that can make awful code that barely, and apparently sometimes just doesn't work, burning enough electricity to power several small countries in the process and lighting billions of dollars on fire.
What, and I can't stress this enough, the fuck are we doing anymore. I swear to God the entire valley needs to be pushed into the ocean and humanity will lurch forward 200 years.
It's possible to accidentally post something, or have it swiped by many of the untrusted and untrustworthy applications on a PC or mobile device.
It's even easier to unintentionally include identifying information when intentionally making a post, whether by failing to catch it when submitting, or by including additional images in your online posting.
There are also wholesale uploads people may make automatically, e.g., when backing up content or transferring data between systems. That may end up unsecured or in someone else's hands.
Even very obscure elements may identify a very specific location. There's a story of how a woman's location was identified by the interior of her hotel room, I believe by the doorknobs. An art piece placed in a remote Utah location was geolocated based on elements of the geology, sun angle, and the like, within a few hours. The art piece is discussed in this NPR piece: <https://www.npr.org/2020/11/28/939629355/unraveling-the-myst...> (2020).
I read the "accidentally" as applying to the "identifying" not the "post", although I agree the sentence structure would suggest "accidentally" as a modifier for "post" that makes a lot less sense.
First, to download the world of Warcraft client, you need to log into the battlenet client, which requires an account. Second, the world of Warcraft client is completely useless without a server to connect to. Alternative world of Warcraft servers are technically possible but illegal to run.
You have to reverse engineer the protocol encryption, which is illegal in some places. Also, lots of copyrighted material such as NPC names and quest text must be stored in the server and transmitted from the server to the client, which is piracy in plain terms.
Yep. This is what the vast majority of “maybe later”s are about. I’ve seen decisions being made based on this fact, and I’ve seen users worried about an irreversible fork in the road.
There are of course cases where “maybe later” does legitimately mean “we’re going to ask you again in a week”. I see those myself, and I hate them.
The worst is both parents working high pressure jobs that bleed into hours outside of "9-5 on weekdays" and even when not working, the stress is omnipresent. I haven't met a single person who is superhuman enough to work one of these jobs and be an involved parent while not allowing their own mental/physical health to deteriorate. One of us had to become a full-time parent and the size of the paycheck determined who it was. Taboos be damned, it felt like life and death at that point.
You are right but in my experience sticking with clasic entertainment solutions works out better.
And I think people are responding to your dilemma with the very sensible solution of just not having kids. Unless you have a very flexible setup somehow, or lots of cash (or both), yeah, child rearing is nightmare fuel.
Your comment mentions that your nephew swaps between games every 5 minutes but it doesn’t say why that is bad. Or maybe I don’t see how the argument follows.
I think GP means it as a symptom. If you can't remain on a single game (which is supposed to be a highly entertaining, dopamine-optimized experience) for more than 5 minutes, what is the likelihood you can stick with any harder task in everyday life for longer?
Plenty of valuable things are less exciting than a video game in their first 300 seconds, and last much longer than 5 minutes.
When I was a child, my parents had me work on a lot of puzzles. They saw this as a way to build attention span, ability to focus, and persistence to achieve long term goals (not to mention that we had the coolest, most intricate puzzles). I would probably work with my children work on something a bit more constructive and realistic, but the point is that as children we build intellectual habits and attention span from what we do, and being unable to focus on highly addictive stimuli for more than five minutes is a symptom of a strong deficit. One might even consider it an intellectual disability.
There is a huge gap between someone pirating a book and one of the richest corporations on the planet pirating seven million books to train their for-profit stuff on.
To be clear, I think copyright should not exist, as I don't think it follows from the basic principles on which our governance is founded. Regardless of my view on the matter, the state will still enforce copyright. Under the written law, this allows people to treat my work as if copyright did not exist (to a reasonable approximation).
Maybe a different, even more permissible license (public domain like) would be more fitting, but I am a practical person and understand that a more common and well understood license is better for this purpose.
If you think copyright shouldn't exist, you're free to ignore any rights afforded you for your work, "the state" is not going to enforce anything unless you bring a case to a court.
I understand the MIT licence as convention, and it makes sense. It's just you're opining on a public forum about copyright being somehow antithetical to "basic principles on which our governance is founded" whilst attaching copyright notices to your work.
Much of common law is specifically about property, upon which a good portion of modern day governance is founded. So your objection to copyright seems somewhat misinformed.
What is it about copyright that you think is a negative in today's society?
> If you think copyright shouldn't exist, you're free to ignore any rights afforded you for your work, "the state" is not going to enforce anything unless you bring a case to a court.
That doesn't give other people who would like to use my work any useful guarantee, though. Without a license, they would be taking a lot of risk, even if they knew my views on copyright.
> Much of common law is specifically about property, upon which a good portion of modern day governance is founded. So your objection to copyright seems somewhat misinformed.
Physical property has exclusive use. Multiple people cannot use 100% of something at the same time. "Intellectual property" has no such trait. Multiple identical copies of the same work can be used by multiple people at the same time.
Ownership defines who has exclusive use of a thing. Copyright actually defies common law by requiring state power to enforce monopolies on certain information, even on property owned by parties with no association to the originator of a work.
> What is it about copyright that you think is a negative in today's society?
Copyright is sold as "promoting the arts" but in net slows innovation and decreases artistic freedom. Especially in its current form with extremely long lifetimes, it primarily enables rent-seeking by publishers at the expense of the public. There are other ways for artists to make money, and many artists already make most of their money by performing live shows, working on commission, selling early access subscriptions, etc.
I'm continuing because this is interesting, not try to prove some point that undermines your perspective.
> Copyright actually defies common law by requiring state power to enforce monopolies on certain information
All laws ultimately require state power. You're deferring to state power by using the MIT licence, which recognises and legitimises copyright law that you take issue with.
> Copyright is sold as "promoting the arts" but in net slows innovation and decreases artistic freedom.
This is a big claim that requires big evidence. Robust copyright law has existed for about half a century, during which time innovation and artistic freedom seem to have flourished. In fact copyright appears to have directly contributed to the creation of the corpus Meta AI is exploiting; it exists because of copyright, not in spite of it.
> [Copyright] primarily enables rent-seeking by publishers at the expense of the public
I think you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Copyright bestows the right of individuals to benefit from the value they create. Without talking about IP law more broadly in a capitalist system (which seems to be your gripe), I think this is a good thing.
I've benefitted greatly from the content of books, as have we all. If authors had to rely on live shows (for a book?), take commissions and sell subscriptions I think we'd all be worse off, because these provide little to no economic security for authors.
The difference is in the real consequences of the action. Which exist regardless of the abstract notions that precede it and which exist regardless of whether anyone accepts those notions.
Yes, unequal enforcement of the law is inherently unjust and ripe for abuse. That doesn't mean the law shouldn't be changed, but a legal system that arbitrarily picks and chooses when it enforces the law is corrupt and has a built in method to persecute and target select people and groups. It undermines the very principle of Rule of Law and allows unjust laws to remain on the books ready to be selectively enforced.
It reminds me of how ezines would publish source codes to run exploits with slight errors so script kiddies couldn’t run them if they didn’t know how to fix them.
reply