grayhatter

12 ms·

61.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> This is itself alarming to me, but no one else seems to find this to be quite damning for the AI services being offered, preferring instanced to be wowed by the convenience and speed at which they can be delivered unreviewed and unprov
62.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
No, it doesn't, or at the very least, that wasn't my read and I don't think that's a reasonable interpretation. The comment starts with the topic, shock at the lack of curiosity from a group happy to comment in the theme
63.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> someone telling you about their lived experience of the world is a gift. I'm not sure about that, but to your higher point, HN hasn't taken pride in it's nominative determinism nature, nor does it appear to be a desired
64.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
So you like the law, but don't like how it didn't actually solve the problem it was trying to solve? I assume you're pretty well read up on matters of privacy, right? So you have a better awareness and understanding. But do y
65.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
No thank you. I meant it when I said it intentionally. I still run BB programs the same way, and expect others to behave similarly. Funny enough I was just talking to that friend this week, about the BB program. Nothing has changed so given
66.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
Your willingness to try to play fair to advertisers (a group with an earned reputation of going out of their way to avoid anything resembling good faith) is admirable, but won't show up in metrics. Protect your attention (and frustrati
67.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
I say we, intentionally not naming the company, because 1) doing so tends to turn off people's brains and they default assume everything $company does is the correct way, but if I say something stupid I'd rather someone tell me, i
68.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> No one is doing 16 step exploits unless you're a huge target in some way. 0.0000001% of companies fit that bill. And even then, ok, what did they get? An account login? What are they doing to do? Read email? Account take over of a
69.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
I said "doesn't matter" to someone once... the resulting lesson came in the form of a reply from the whitehat researcher ( waves , hi brian!) a 16step exploit chain resulting in a one click full account takeover. I'm equ
70.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
If you believe this, then why did you say? > starting to think security through obscurity might not be a bad thing
71.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> I don't know what methods where used to find these exploits but I am starting to think security through obscurity might not be a bad thing in this day and age, where someone can just let bots loose on your codebase. I'd love
72.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> At the time I post these, none have been reported. Feel free to report them yourself and take credit for the CVE if handed out lulz. I do this so to allure people into the field, and I've always found this is the most efficient w
73.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> I am thoroughly seduced by a power I've never felt, even if I see it as poison. Meditate on the idea of the negative sum game the people who seek power prefer, and then about what you'd rather see them, or yourself do with th
74.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> It seems to incentivize the contributor to try [to do something unethical] I find the argument that the act of enforcing rules to protect the things that you want to protect, as the thing that incentivizes someone else to lie, stupid.
75.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> Incentives drives the outcome. What incentives does this give people? I understand this argument to be, if you stop people from doing something you don't want them to do to you, you're only incentivizing them to lie to you,
76.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> but he never said he was willing to lie, he was offering a hypothetical. I disagree with your assessment. > First of all, I could’ve hidden the fact of LLM usage, and yet decided to declare it explicitly. By being truthful I already
77.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
Neither matter. The maintainer isn't required to adopt how they want to protect their repo, and lower the amount of value they perceive it to have. They can reject any patch for any reason, or no reason at all. No one is owed any cont
78.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
I have an exceptionally strong, visceral, negative reaction to people who aren't offended by the arguments the author makes in this post. Your patch was rejected because the maintainer objects to the source and tooling used to generate
79.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
Your example is incorrect. @ptrCast has the same (similar, if you want to be pedantic to the exclusion of good faith) result rules. If you need @as to @ptrcast, you'd need it to @bitCast as well. > It is significantly worse to take
80.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
BAH! and I forgot to say the most important part. Much more important, thanks for not just the devlog, and explaining the changes. But also; thanks for fixing/improving this! I appreciate all the work you've put in, I really enjoy
81.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
How confident are you? I ask because I'm a zig zealot, and am constantly shilling for it. But I disagree with a number of ark's positions, and think of him as a bit of a shitter... So I don't think "cult of personality&q
82.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
I can only answer for me, and while I do think it's more significant a metric for me, I equally assume it probably has some influence on others as well. C3 uses :: for namespaces, that makes it a competitor with C++ more than C. Equall
83.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
oh, I think it's mostly frustration over how eager everyone is to delegate their thinking to literally anything else, accelerated by [gestures at reality]. Is frustration with apathy really pretentious?
84.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
??
85.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
> Quite long devlog coming up, apologies—I got a little carried away with this one! mlugg, please don't apologize for creating something I actually want to read. I'm drowning in low effort garbage, the in depth technical explan
86.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
Oh no, someone is profiting of the work of others?! anyways...
87.
by grayhatter 3mo ago
It's really impressive how you could apparently argue so strongly for Fender's defense: but the message that I took away was Fender is obviously the bad guy in this story, and I want nothing to do with them... and I haven't e
88.
by grayhatter 4mo ago
> Eh, it depends on the workflow. Especially if you have certain stack based workflows. I would normally assume there's 0 percent chance that `git` (the binary) is a significant impact on LLM based devel. The same applies to git, th
89.
by grayhatter 4mo ago
The way you define the evaluation criteria seems very problematic[^1]. I don't understand the point of describing it as 3 possible outcomes. I objected to it because the only reason I would do something like that would be to obscure th
90.
by grayhatter 4mo ago
That's weird, why do you do that? When someone asks a question, if I don't know the answer; I say I don't know. System 1 vs 2 doesn't really matter... I won't use an LLM that's willing to make up random shit. E

More ›