eschaton

39 ms·

331.
by eschaton 2y ago
Mach as deployed at NeXT was also never a microkernel, and combined the BSD 4.2 kernel. I believe this is also effectively what OSF/1 did with the OSF variant of Mach. Mach has basically always supported that kind of use, even back to
332.
by eschaton 2y ago
And even if you did this, which may in principle be possible, you still wouldn’t be able to prove that there aren’t any backdoors leveraging unexpected physical interactions between components. For example, even if everything was provably m
333.
by eschaton 2y ago
You don’t actually believe patents and other licensing regimes are good, do you?
334.
by eschaton 2y ago
You cannot patent an instruction set architecture, but you can patent mechanisms used in the implementation of the instruction set architecture. This is an extremely important distinction. Usually these patents are written such that it’s di
335.
by eschaton 2y ago
It would in light of decades of case law prior to Google v. Oracle. An instruction set itself is not protectable IP, only descriptions and implementations are. What restricts new implementations are: 1. Existing legal agreements, eg if you
336.
by eschaton 2y ago
> arguably the most important company on earth right now This is some Nicholas Negroponte level science fiction charlatan handwaving right here. LLMs are stochastic parrots. What you’re experiencing when you see its output is essentially
337.
by eschaton 2y ago
Or an indictment of pg’s. (It’s this.)
338.
by eschaton 2y ago
No, it’s technically equivalent. I be legally equivalent it would be required to prove (or disprove) intent.
339.
by eschaton 2y ago
Wearing a mask is more effective at preventing you from spreading virus particles if you’re infected than it is at preventing you from being infected.
340.
by eschaton 2y ago
I recall that only some wanted him back, and the split was product/research—the “let’s get rich!” types wanted him back, the “let’s do AI!” types adamantly didn’t.
341.
by eschaton 2y ago
It’s extremely clear that their intent was to use her voice, not just a gestalt or tone, given that they approached her multiple times—including after they’d actually implemented it using another voice actor. Do you really think that ever
342.
by eschaton 2y ago
Why would anyone want to do CAD in a web page? JavaScript should be limited to 1997 Netscape 3.0 performance to stop this kind of garbage. And WASM should never have been attempted, and should be removed. Write real native software if you’r
343.
by eschaton 2y ago
Again, you’re looking for some sort of absolute that either allows or prohibits something in all cases based on a set of ironclad rules, and that doesn’t exist because intent matters in human endeavor. If a similar voice was used because
344.
by eschaton 2y ago
Because she inherently owns the rights to her voice and they’re attempting to reproduce it without her permission. This has been litigated in multiple cases. If they had just wanted to be _reminiscent of_ “Her” they could have a different o
345.
by eschaton 2y ago
Uh, what? This is a pretty well-researched phenomenon: A very high percentage of people who engage in pathological behaviors that take advantage of other people believe that “everyone does it” and rely on that as justification. Penn & T
346.
by eschaton 2y ago
Because they are using her likeness without her permission. If they just wanted a “similar” voice they could have hired one from the start. They wanted her voice and when she said “no” they used it anyway. The “her” tweet makes it excepti
347.
by eschaton 2y ago
Uh, we all should know exactly who and what Sam Altman is by now. He’s absolutely been the bad guy all along.
348.
by eschaton 2y ago
Most people aren’t that selfish or petty. But there are some people who are—and by an unfortunate quirk of human nature, they tend to believe everyone else is just like them.
349.
by eschaton 2y ago
Amen. We need ethics and accountability and this wave of “AI” has been sorely lacking those, instead preferring the Uber model of “let’s just get big enough to bully things into working out in our favor.” It’s important to nip that shit in
350.
by eschaton 2y ago
Where do you get this idea that LLMs can be useful “to decode unknown languages” at all?
351.
by eschaton 2y ago
Hmm, I’ll be sure to tell the people I know with health problems from secondhand smoke that they’re wrong then, and that they should just get over themselves.
352.
by eschaton 2y ago
The original poster is just expressing a knee-jerk assumption that it’ll be assumed to be ecologically bad and outlawed for that, while simultaneously expressing that they don’t believe that reasoning when applied to other things that are a
353.
by eschaton 2y ago
We don’t regulate where people can smoke tobacco because of the smell, we regulate where people can smoke tobacco because of the health impact of secondhand smoke.
354.
by eschaton 2y ago
Not that well-regarded any more since his fabrications came to light.
355.
by eschaton 2y ago
And what, pray tell, was wrong with VMS? In my experience it works quite well.
356.
by eschaton 2y ago
It also depends on how the operating system and frameworks actually work. For instance, the backing store for the window may be “charged to” the application on macOS but may be provided by the OS on another platform, or there may not even b
357.
by eschaton 2y ago
This is basically what Go PenPoint programming was like. When you read the Go documentation it’s very clear they intended to use Objective-C or an equivalent preprocessor; I suspect they were stymied by NeXT’s acquisition or Stepstone and t
358.
by eschaton 2y ago
Care to expand on this, provide evidence, or even pointers to what you mean by it?
359.
by eschaton 2y ago
And what is that reason?
360.
by eschaton 2y ago
How do you know?

More ›