naasking

20 ms·

391.
by naasking 10mo ago
You're leaking implementation details if you let exceptions bubble. Sometimes this is ok if all of the callers are aware of the implementation details anyway, but it can make refactoring or changing implementations more difficult other
392.
by naasking 10mo ago
Good review, but I frankly don't see the point of Result<T0, T1>. Just have the error be an exception type as exceptions idiomatically represents errors in .NET. Then you're down to only 1 type argument which is much less no
393.
by naasking 10mo ago
They do with AI, that's the point.
394.
by naasking 10mo ago
Developers can learn a new programming language in a few weeks to months of just using it. If they can't learn to reliably and predictably use CSS in the same way, then I'd say that makes CSS flawed.
395.
by naasking 10mo ago
Knowing how to use LLMs is a skill. Just winging it without any practice or exploration of how the tool fails can produce poor results.
396.
by naasking 10mo ago
Great, and I think that's incorrect, and only getting more incorrect every year, and perhaps you should consider trusting researchers in this field to know how and when to use their own tools correctly. I suppose that's all there
397.
by naasking 10mo ago
That's just not true, and even if LLMs did introduce more errors than humans, if you can't trust the author to proof read a summary article about his own papers, then you shouldn't trust the papers either.
398.
by naasking 10mo ago
Because articles are high level summaries of detailed work. What's self defeating about that? > that is harder to do when there’s no mind behind the words. Presumably the author read the text before publish and agreed with the summa
399.
by naasking 10mo ago
Well that's a completely wrong take.
400.
by naasking 10mo ago
Who cares if it was enhanced with LLMs? That's not determinative of whether the article is accurate and valuable.
401.
by naasking 10mo ago
One of the rare cases where the answer to a headline question is "yes".
402.
by naasking 10mo ago
> I don't believe it is possible (or even makes sense) to completely avoid illegal/invalid objects and structures, and a cheap way to mark these are nil pointers Obviously we should be able to represent objects with possibly in
403.
by naasking 10mo ago
> The article makes no mention of hate speech laws or anyone being prosecuted under them for discussing the representation of various ethnicities in sexual-assault statistics. Consider the counterfactual: if hate speech laws were not in
404.
by naasking 10mo ago
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/child-rape-scandal-dominati...
405.
by naasking 10mo ago
> Okay, so just to be clear, you don't have even a single example of someone being prosecuted To be clear, I haven't even looked, but being a recent topic of debate, it seems important to clearly establish the letter of the law
406.
by naasking 10mo ago
Does the law explicitly specify that dry facts would be excluded? Or is it sufficiently broad that dry facts could be included if some over-zealous bureaucrats get it in their head that some speech or people are problematic? I am interested
407.
by naasking 10mo ago
> It's pretty apparent that the arrests are happening to people who explicitly call for violence Unless the statute specifically makes that distinction, then that's not very compelling. There are already laws against inciting v
408.
by naasking 10mo ago
Democracies virtually never form a consensus, there are always dissenters on any issue. Democracies reach decisions by majority rule, not consensus.
409.
by naasking 10mo ago
> which made it an offence to stir up or incite racial hatred. If you point out that one racial demographic is responsible for more crimes than another, would that run afoul of the statute? If not, what if you additionally point out that
410.
by naasking 10mo ago
> In the first case it's not just "arrested for praying" it's "arrested for being in an exclusion zone specifically designated to try and stop you harassing people undertaking a lawful activity". They would
411.
by naasking 10mo ago
Why? The core vision of free software and many open source licenses was to empower users and developers to make things they need without being financially extorted, to avoid having users locked in to proprietary systems, to enable interoper
412.
by naasking 10mo ago
> If we were to re-write browser standards today, cross-domain POST requests probably just wouldn't be permitted. That would be a terrible idea IMO. The insecurity was fundamentally introduced by cookies, which were always a hack. T
413.
by naasking 10mo ago
If the language spec requires TCO, I think you can reasonably call it part of the language.
414.
by naasking 10mo ago
> We're not gonna see significant model shrinkage until the money tap dries up. I'm not sure about that. Microsoft has been doing great work on "1-bit" LLMs, and dropping the memory requirements would significantly cu
415.
by naasking 10mo ago
They are better in some ways, but they're also neutered.
416.
by naasking 10mo ago
I think the missile impact creates a lot more garbage spread over a wider area.
417.
by naasking 10mo ago
> while LLMs are just echoing narrow portions of the intelligent output of humans But they aren't just echoing, that's the point. You really need to stop ignoring the extrapolation abilities in these domains. The point of the j
418.
by naasking 10mo ago
Seems fair. XSS is a confused deputy attack, a type of vulnerability known since the 1980s. That we keep reinventing it in every new medium is frankly embarassing.
419.
by naasking 10mo ago
SVG also supports event attributes, so you should probably strip those too.
420.
by naasking 10mo ago
> But your analogy can't support you on the assertion that optimizations will be sophisticated and reliable enough to completely forget about the programming language underneath. Where did I make that assertion?

More ›