shawnz

11 ms·

121.
by shawnz 2y ago
What's the proposal here, just convince everyone to stop demanding more powerful hardware?
122.
by shawnz 2y ago
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/wp:beans
123.
by shawnz 2y ago
But it's behind certain controls such as rate limits and other anti-abuse techniques, hence the researchers' difficulty, right?
124.
by shawnz 2y ago
I agree that this seems like a net positive to me overall.
125.
by shawnz 2y ago
Not exactly: in the security space, we have better tools available than obscurity. But in the spam/abuse prevention space, obscurity is the best you can do.
126.
by shawnz 2y ago
One possible counterargument is that bad actors could use the data to improve their spamming or astroturfing methods.
127.
by shawnz 2y ago
Another question about this issue: in the case of `:a*` for example, why doesn't it just pick empty string as the replacement text and immediately exit? Why would it be an infinite loop if `-g` isn't specified? And then if `-g` we
128.
Show HN: Steganographically encode messages with LLMs and Arithmetic Coding(github.com)
7 points by shawnz 2y ago|1 comments
129.
by shawnz 2y ago
That's the entire reason for representative democracy over direct democracy
130.
by shawnz 2y ago
That is what ExecStop means. It specifies how you want to cause the service to stop. But the lifetime of the service isn't exactly the same thing as the lifetime of the process that got started in ExecStart. Maybe think about it this w
131.
by shawnz 2y ago
Yes, so whether the service is stopping as a result of the process exiting, or whether you requested the service to stop manually, it will run the ExecStop in either case. That makes sense to me personally. What would be the more intuitive
132.
by shawnz 2y ago
I would argue the semantics of ExecStop are always the same. It's the command that's executed to stop the service. On the other hand, what it means for a service to be "running" or "stopping" naturally depends
133.
by shawnz 2y ago
I think you actually probably want type=oneshot (and also RemainAfterExit=yes) for the kind of service you're describing
134.
by shawnz 2y ago
How do you falsify mass hysteria with that strategy?
135.
by shawnz 2y ago
The SQL null is a database-specific keyword and not something that's part of the domain of your measurements. If you want some kind of sentinel value for your measurements that doesn't have the "unknown" meaning of SQL n
136.
by shawnz 2y ago
Exactly, that's why I'm saying it's a more challenging problem than it appears and there's no one solution that always gives the best experience in every case. I personally think a hybrid approach of allowing some limite
137.
by shawnz 2y ago
The first one is the only one that can accurately describe where the user intended for the message to land in the conversation. All the others are subject to network delays, so if you order messages by anything other than the first one, you
138.
by shawnz 2y ago
If you don't allow the client to specify the time they sent the messages, then anyone who has a poor connection is going to be subject to an annoying behaviour where their messages are constantly going out of the intended order during
139.
by shawnz 2y ago
I'm not talking about message editing but rather posting new messages with a backdated time.
140.
by shawnz 2y ago
Also, even if different characters were used, the 2D ascii art style representation of the directory tree in general strikes me as something that's not going to be easily interpreted by an LLM, which might not have a conception of how
141.
by shawnz 2y ago
My point is that some limited reordering maybe should be allowed, but not too much. That is to say, the problem isn't as simple as just doing it one way or another way. Every approach has some disadvantages.
142.
by shawnz 2y ago
Aside from the concerns with decentralized servers that the other poster mentioned, this has the disadvantage that your messages are going to get constantly reordered to not match the intended flow of the conversation when you have poor con
143.
by shawnz 2y ago
For example, you could reject the message and show the user an error but only if there's a discrepancy of >X minutes. But how much discrepancy should be allowed? I don't know, I only mean to show why I think the solution isn&#x
144.
by shawnz 2y ago
Then instead imagine this: the user really is innocent and just happened to coincidentally send the message right after the start of a long period of poor connectivity (like a flight, or a road trip, etc). If you just allow it to go through
145.
by shawnz 2y ago
I'm not talking about edits, I'm talking about sending new messages which are backdated to appear as part of an older conversation
146.
by shawnz 2y ago
But there's a flag which indicates they've been edited and you can see the edit history, right? So that's not useful for this scenario.
147.
by shawnz 2y ago
How far back should you be able to amend history? What if a malicious client adds messages to a conversation that happened in the past? Imagine for example I'm at work and notice a critical mistake that I missed, and so I retroactively
148.
by shawnz 2y ago
I think the more reasonable assumption is that the practical needs of the biggest users will probably trump what any specification demands. The thing stopping the compiler from doing dangerous behaviours in response to commonly abused UB is
149.
by shawnz 2y ago
I think what you are saying is orthogonal to what they are saying. You can be positive and optimistic about big scale societal changes that throw out all the established notions. Likewise, you can also be cynical and jaded about small scale
150.
by shawnz 2y ago
Background playback just works with Firefox on Android with no extensions required.

More ›