I wouldn’t do any of that in a CI-only system. If I did, I’d use tools that exist for those jobs that already allow scripting languages.
I dislike scam money as much as the next person. I do not, however, dislike cryptography. There’s a really good common in the thread about elliptic curve cryptography not having a place on Codeberg anymore and I think that’s valid. I don’t even know if OpenSSL could have a place on Codeberg with this decision. Their nonprofit, their rules. Just not very libre-minded and definitely sets a bad precedent. And before someone tells me Microsoft actively censors GitHub, this isn’t a whataboutism thread. It just reduces my trust in a supposedly open collective.
This is a boilerplate example. I asked for something more than boilerplate. Give me some reasons why I need an incredibly stateful CI engine.
AFAIK there have been no cases setting precedence for this copyright attack globally. I am also not aware of any hosting platform under government attack for hosting AI works. Similarly, the WTFPL has no precedence and its legal status is unclear (contrast against GPL and Apache precedence). However, Codeberg recommends WTFPL. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that all 650k+ projects on Codeberg have better security than AI slop.
Either be consistent or stay off the fucking bandwagon. If you’re going to make copyright a big deal, you can only advocate for licenses that have precedence. If you’re going to say shitty security slop matters, you need a real security review process and active testing+moderation. Moderation like this opens up different classifications of scrutiny and isn’t a good look for a libre platform.
Note that I think the idea is solid and agree with the reasoning. I just don’t think this is the execution that makes people think differently about AI.
Looking at the examples, you’ve just made a brand new GitHub Actions framework. There’s YAML to wrap everything together and a bunch of Python that’s so declarative it might as well be HCL. Do you have an example that’s a bit more than “do what YAML does only in bash?”
While they can’t buy a pardon, they can buy “asylum.” Until they’re out of the US there’s no guarantee Trump won’t break yet another legal system to do whatever the fuck he wants. Interpol is, after all, not his idea so he has little reason to respect it.
Yeah, and I described the actually infuriating thing about the post.
I think the actually infuriating thing here is that subs like r/interestingasfuck were made because r/mildlyinteresting basically turned into “look at this thing I saw” without any critical evaluation. Those subs soon fell prey to the same shit. Unsurprisingly, it’s now infected the Lemmy communities too. “I saw this thing once” isn’t fucking mildly interesting. It’s fucking annoying.
In this instance I genuinely do not understand how photos of massive construction make anyone go “huh, that’s kinda interesting but not super interesting what a novelty.” If I’m super fucking gracious and OP has never ever seen satellite photos before or even considered the concept that could be slightly novel but that’s a fucking stretch.
You took this from Reddit’s r/interestingasfuck and posted it to c/mildlyinteresting? Clearly neither is a good fit because this isn’t interesting at all.
If you are saying the probability of sampling something with half ones and zeroes is greater than the probability of getting 0000 0000 or 1111 1111, that is a correct statement because you’re sampling the output, not the generation. The probability of generating 1010 1010 is the same as the probability of generating 0101 0101 which is the same probability as generating 0000 0000 or 1111 1111 or 1111 0000 or 0000 1111. You’re looking at the difference between (8 choose 4) vs (8 choose 8).
However, in a truly random system, 0000 0000 will appear as often as 1010 1010. The distinction of “solid patterns” is meaningless at scale. You’re the one differentiating between the two. Now as we analyze the randomness, we would expect more samples that have four ones than have eight ones, but we would also expect an equalish number of each pattern to appear (eg 0011 1100 appears the same amount as 1100 0011 which appears the same amount as 0000 0000).
You’ve conflated the number of patterns with the number of ones or zeroes that appear in the patterns.
I’m gonna need you to explain your math here. More specifically, I want to know which bytes are going to appear more often when you are generating them in sequence with an equal probability of each digit being zero and one.
Let’s take the other track and instead assume that byte generation is uniformly distributed. In fact, let’s go stronger and assume that any binary number generated by coin flips is uniformly distributed. The base case is a single flip. We have two possibilities, head or tails, each with 50% probability. This means our resulting numbers, 0 and 1, occur with equal probability. This is the uniform distribution. Now assume a binary number of length k - 1 generated by coin flips is uniformly distributed. A binary number of length k is composed of a number of length k - 1 and a single flip. The first k - 1 parts create a range of [0, 2 ^ (k - 1) - 1] and are uniformly distributed. Let’s put our new bit at the front. A 0 gives gives the current range, [0, 2 ^ (k - 1) - 1], and a 1 gives us [2 ^ (k - 1), 2 ^ k - 1]. Note we have an equal probability of falling into either space and they are the same size. In other words, a binary number of length k generated by coin flips is uniformly distributed.
The Litter Robots I’m aware of rotate with the door at the pole, meaning the cat can always jump out. If the cat jumps in when the globe is dumping into the waste drawer, the globe does not rotate with enough force to seriously injure the cat. If you’re genuinely worried, stick your arm in and try to force it so you can get a sense of the absolute worst case scenario.
I think there are plenty of things to not be thrilled with Litter Robot about. I don’t feel this is one of them.
