sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago

Tables and/or spacer gifs.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 week ago

https://cuelang.org/. I deal with a lot of k8s at work, and I've grown to hate YAML for complex configuration. The extra guardrails that Cue provides are hugely helpful for large projects.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 weeks ago

If it's a publicly-accessible repo, then immediately revoke the key and leave it. Force-pushing isn't good enough because the old commit will still be tracked by Git until the garbage collector kicks in, and you don't have control over the GC on GitHub (not sure about other providers).

If it's an internal repo that's only accessible by employees, then you probably should still revoke it, but you've got more leeway. Usually I'd create a ticket to revoke it when there's time, unless this is particularly sensitive.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 255 points 1 month ago

Harris will be able to serve two terms. The 22nd amendment says:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once

The second clause applies to vice presidents taking over, but since there's less than two years left in Biden's term, it won't come into effect.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It depends on the role. My first job was doing manual QE on Windows, and knowing Linux wasn't much help at the time, but it did help me transition to a coding role in the same company a year later. I'm now doing platform engineering at a major tech company, but that has a high barrier to entry, which I suspect is the case for most roles that are Linux-focused. If you're trying to get your foot in the door, I think you should look at job profiles for low barrier to entry roles (e.g. tech support) and try to work your way up.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Probably because the individual engineers working on Takeout care about doing a good job, even though the higher-ups would prefer something half-assed. I work for a major tech company and I've been in that same situation before, e.g. when I was working on GDPR compliance. I read the GDPR and tried hard to comply with the spirit of the law, but it was abundantly clear everyone above me hadn't read it and only cared about doing the bare minimum.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 112 points 1 month ago

There's no financial incentive for them to make is easy to leave Google. Takeout only exists to comply with regulations (e.g. digital markets act), and as usual, they're doing the bare minimum to not get sued.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

Reminds me of this:

295

From the conclusion:

NAT may be a good short term solution to the address depletion and scaling problems. This is because it requires very few changes and can be installed incrementally. NAT has several negative characteristics that make it inappropriate as a long term solution, and may make it inappropriate even as a short term solution. Only implementation and experimentation will determine its appropriateness.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 156 points 4 months ago

Wait till she learns about zombie children

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 months ago

For extra fun, you can name your variables using solely Unicode invisible characters (e.g. non-breaking space) so they're impossible to visually distinguish

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 37 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the rich and powerful have a vested interest in not taking risks that jeopardize their power and wealth, because they have more to lose.

[-] BodilessGaze@sh.itjust.works 73 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The reason these models are being heavily censored is because big companies are hyper-sensitive to the reputational harm that comes from uncensored (or less-censored) models. This isn't unique to AI; this same dynamic has played out countless times before. One example is content moderation on social media sites: big players like Facebook tend to be more heavy-handed about moderating than small players like Lemmy. The fact small players don't need to worry so much about reputational harm is a significant competitive advantage, since it means they have more freedom to take risks, so this situation is probably temporary.

view more: next ›

BodilessGaze

joined 1 year ago