4 ms·

this website uses non-free javascript

• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• baylearn 8y ago
  How so?
  • mappu 8y ago
    Even in the FLOSS world this is a somewhat extremist position - see https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.en.html
    • SuperNinKenDo 8y ago
      Interesting, I'm inclined to support some way of removing code obfuscation. I wonder if a neural network could be trained to do that.
      • mappu 8y ago
        It can be done reasonably well without a neural network (look at the '{}' button in Chrome, or Hex-rays for C/C++). There is some work in applying an NN to make the result look more like "realistic" code samples: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/data/katz-saner-2018-preprint.pdf http://www.cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/data/katz-saner-2018-preprin...
• SuperNinKenDo 8y ago
  Thanks for bringing this to my attention, although a link to the Stallman article which someone linked below would have been helpful. I've installed LibreJS, I'm curious to see how many things stop working now.
• gitgud 8y ago
  It's a software firm, which do machine learning projects... Aren't they allowed to obfuscate they're IP?
• hardmaru 8y ago
  Interesting I think the reason that you believe the JS code is obfuscated is because the part of the code that contains the “weights” of the neural network, which contains 4-5 million floating point numbers of an LSTM recurrent neural network. In fact I trained the neural network using the open source version of Sketch-RNN and encoded the weights using base64 to save you some bandwidth (https://github.com/tensorflow/magenta/tree/master/magenta/models/sketch_rnn https://github.com/tensorflow/magenta/tree/master/magenta/mo...) Welcome to “Software 2.0”, I guess!