Yes of course they do. It’s important (to them) that we alternate exclusively between right-wingers in red and right-wingers in blue. If they allow socialists into power even once, the Overton window will be dragged to the left and their owners can’t allow that.

That’s a weird way to say “we’re cooking the planet”.

For the uninitiated.

He compared an LLM to a compiler suggesting that the concerns about using them are the same as suggesting that everyone should write in assembly.

The comparison is invalid, since one mode is deterministic, while the other is not.

LLM-driven development leads to programming via the abstraction of the model, disconnecting you from the source to the point where you don’t understand what it’s done or why. He’s suggesting that this isn’t a problem because an LLM is just like a compiler, which suggests that he’s arguing in bad faith or doesn’t understand the “tools” he’s using.

Does he… think LLMs are deterministic?

Your work lets you use Linux?

“Regret” what exactly? Helping the people trying to erase them?

Honestly? Gentoo. It’s got a steep learning curve, but the docs are great and after your first install, you’ll know more about Linux than most users.

I really enjoyed Elizabeth May’s “Losing Confidence” if you’re into nonfiction.

I’d be more upset about this if cars were also fitted with speed limiters.

and I don’t see any value in limiting classification to the domain level. How would one classify wikipedia.org in this scenario? Would it not make more sense to define an open standard that’d leverage this system but allow domain managers to define it themselves?

To take my university.tld as the example, that university might host a file called at https://university.tld/ocs.json that looks something like this:

{
  "/": "EDU"
  "/math": "MAT",
  "/journalism": "JOU",
}

(Heads up to OP: there’s no journalism in your current spec. That feels like an oversight.)

This would allow the high-content site admins to classify parts of the site differently. The /ocs.json file might even be dynamically generated for complex sites like Wikipedia.

I’m curious as to why you’d limit this to the domain level. A university for example might have thousands of URLs in it with wildly different subjects:

• university.tld/math/student-name/thesis-on-mathy-subject/
• university.tld/journalism/student-name/big-story-about-politics

How would your system account for this?

You’re making a lot of assumptions that have yet to be backed up with evidence. There have been a lot of inventions that people claimed were revolutionary and “here to stay” that have since been confined to history has a bad idea: blockchain and NFTs most recently, asbestos & DDT somewhat further back. Just because boosters like yourself have drunk the kool-aid is not sufficient evidence for your claim.

But that’s beside the point. The Canadian government doesn’t need to pour public funds into “AI” for it to succeed. Indeed if it’s as revolutionary as you claim, the public will spend their own funds or demand their taxes cover it… but they aren’t, are they? The public overwhelmingly hate it save for base entertainment. That’s not revolution, it’s very expensive porn, temporarily subsided by billionaires.

The cost of “AI” is astronomical, and I’m not just talking about the finances. The environmental cost is civilisation-crippling, and the benefits produced so far amount to [checks notes] a net loss in the hundreds of billions of dollars, stolen culture, skill atrophy, loss of agency, oh! and psychosis.

Put the kool-aid down friend and try looking at this more objectively. It’s a non-solution for a problem we don’t have that’s causing incalculable harm. Public money should not be funding it.

Back in the days when WordPress started out, 1GB of RAM was a lot! You’d be surprised what you can do when you’re just running a server.

Coffee of Doom!

It sounds like a pretty cool project, thanks for sharing! As a browser-based project designed to run offline, you might want to consider shipping it as an electron app.

She’s 100% correct here, I’ve seen it myself in discussions here on Lemmy too. Any criticisms of Carney and his policies are met with accusations of American support by people who appear to view politics like a zero-sum game.

Autocracy and surveillance are not requirements for socialism. Indeed FLOSS is basically communism for software of you think about it.

This community has a lot of China boosters who like to paint the country as some sort of idealised socialist utopia, but you’re right: it’s an autocratic surveillance state. As Free software is essentially incompatible with the demands of such a state, I wouldn’t say it’s compatible with China. That doesn’t mean it’s incompatible with socialism though.

[LLM executes it to test]

I don’t understand. The DDS is old enough to be out of copyright and patents aren’t nearly as long-lived, so what are these people using to restrict your right to it?