loup-vaillant

5 ms·

1.
by loup-vaillant 17d ago
A starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_child_por... There seems to be conflicting evidence, fraught with spurious correlations on both sides. Honestly, I'm not sure which policy I&#x
2.
by loup-vaillant 17d ago
Anything with branches cannot execute at all on a GPU? You sure about that? https://developer.nvidia.com/gpugems/gpugems2/part-iv-genera...
3.
by loup-vaillant 18d ago
> these AI models not only lend themselves to generation of Child Sexual Abuse Material Err, how exactly does the generation of questionnable material abuses a child? Assuming there's no actual CSAM in the training corpus, the cau
4.
by loup-vaillant 18d ago
> exposing a stable instruction set would kill their ability to quickly iterate I believe the need to quickly iterate dropped significantly since we got shaders. I would bet in fact there was few such iterations in the last 10 years.
5.
by loup-vaillant 18d ago
Or we could regulate. One hammer I'm tempted to use is to simply forbid sales and importation of hardware made by companies that also distribute software. That way the only way to sell you hardware is to make sure its interfaces are bo
6.
by loup-vaillant 18d ago
> GPUs will never be general purpose Well in that sense, neither will CPUs. Just like GPUs, some workloads are better left to other kinds of hardware.
7.
by loup-vaillant 18d ago
> The way they work under the hood has changed fundamentally maybe 4 times in that span. How many times since we got shaders? And when exactly? I bet each change takes longer to come than the last. I mean, GPUs are increasingly general p
8.
by loup-vaillant 18d ago
Okay, so, GPUs are taking one more step towards being general purpose massively parallel machines. That's cool. What would be even cooler though would be for GPU vendors to start giving us the user manual. An I mean the real user m
9.
by loup-vaillant 28d ago
I love the self contradiction in this one.
10.
by loup-vaillant 1mo ago
Then just outlaw big corps. Put a hard cap on company size or capital, possibly on a per-domain basis. Or just put what has to be big infrastructure under direct state control. Worked wonders in practice in France. Oh, and also put a hard
11.
by loup-vaillant 1mo ago
If I recall correctly most software work goes to custom software. Note that in many, possibly most, cases, the (sole) customer retains the exclusive rights to the source code, making the software effectively Free per the FSF definition (be
12.
by loup-vaillant 1mo ago
Or have a universal income. Capitalism isn't inevitable. And it will end anyway, at it hits planetary limits. Better start thinking of alternatives before one of the worst ones gets imposed on us.
13.
by loup-vaillant 1mo ago
My fear exactly.
14.
by loup-vaillant 1mo ago
> The German courts entirely disregarded our use of geo-IP lookups on queries, and asserted that since tests via a VPN were able to resolve the domain, we were in breach of court orders Seriously, what the fuck? So you're supposed
15.
by loup-vaillant 1mo ago
Said democracy does have to be real, though. If we're talking about that country between two oceans that waged armed conflicts almost constantly since its very inception, has supported or helped put in place straight-up dictatorships n
16.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
It would, but then there’s another dilemma: in a country where there’s a limit to how far into pregnancy you can abort, that pill could easily be used over that limit, and then you have to question whether the increased availability is wort
17.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
> No one, whether a doctor or not, should be forced by the state to end the life of any being. I feel you. But that right not to kill, conflicts with the autonomy of women. Which is more important? > I do not trust any state, gove
18.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
> Pro-choice people "believe" that it isn't. Not all of us I would bet. One can believe the fetus is a human life, and still want to allow the mother ending it. Sure it’s rough, but this is a classic case of conflict
19.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
There are several aspects to this. One is control over women. Another is panic over the idea that other people with darker skin tone might overrun us with their reproductive might; either by mating like rabbits, or straight up stealing ou
20.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
> If access is not easy, there needs to be a different solution. Indeed, access must be made easy. Abortion, through a pill or otherwise, should be accessible anywhere, freely, and any medical record should be kept absolutely secret,
21.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
I mean it needs to be made standard because of how bloody useful that is. More people need to be made aware (industry knowledge inertia), and it needs to be usable pretty much everywhere (ecosystem inertia). C and C++ start out so unsafe, I
22.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
You can kinda do this in C++ too with `std::vector::reserve()`. The thing is if my collection has no known bounds, well, maybe this time it requires 64GB of space? Except RAM is at a premium and I only have 16GB right now, and no swap spac
23.
by loup-vaillant 2mo ago
A fourth alternative, in 64-bit systems, is to reserve a stupidly large chunk of memory up front with `mmap()` or equivalent (`malloc()` actually should work about as well). That way you guarantee that any extension will happen in place.
24.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
> malloc/free, not being a language feature, cannot be reasoned about. They’re defined in the standard all the same. Of course they can be reasoned with. The defined parts at least. You may argue that the undefined parts cannot
25.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
> It can be reasoned about, but doing so correctly is very difficult […]. I don’t think this is controversial? It’s actually much easier than 95% of programmers think. The trick is to stop using fine grained allocations all the time,
26.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
Then it needs to be made standard. Without that, or an equivalent solution, garbage collected languages will remain unusable in constrained environments.
27.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
First, I’m not familiar with the Go ecosystem. I have never written a single line of Go, and I learned in this thread that there was more than one compiler. Second, please don’t accuse me of engaging in bad faith. I’m not. My question was g
28.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
> In practice, if you were going use Go on a microcontroller you would not use the same compiler as you would use if you writing a web server. Is that a fact? Are you telling me that today , there's a Go compiler that's best
29.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
"Just don’t use it" is a valid argument, if it’s clear when you’re using it or not. It’s easy not to use `malloc()`: just don’t call it, and don’t call dependencies that call it. Same for Rust’s string: don’t construct strings,
30.
by loup-vaillant 3mo ago
> Most software written today doesn't need to do manual memory management. Need? Not really, not on the desktop (embedded is a different story entirely). But there are still benefits, as well as costs. Thing is, most programmers h

More ›