TehPers

Does this mean the SCOTUS is giving Biden free reign to free up some seats?

I felt like neither side really answered the question about how they planned to address addictions in the US. They both talked about the US-Mexico border and trying to catch more imported drugs, but failed to address domestic production, and more importantly, failed to answer how they plan to address addiction in the US (as in current and future addicts).

Also, the whole question about physical ability diverted so off topic that I lost what they were even talking about. Biden seemed to try to answer it, but then it took a sharp turn towards weight and golfing skills?

Edit: I should also add that yes, Biden tended to stay on topic more. Trump always seemed to be answering a different/previous question instead.

The debate covered important questions of national significance, including whether Trump had intercourse with a porn star, who was better at golf, each of their physical health conditions (including Trump’s height and weight and apparently cognitive ability), and even featured a modern use of the word “malarchy”. They might as well make a short, catchy intro for it, break it up into episodes, and advertise it as a sitcom.

The debate was completely useless. The only thing I got from it was that Biden’s brain still works but his body doesn’t, and Trump’s body still works but his brain doesn’t. There were some slight mentions of hot topics and each of their positions on the subject, but there was so much jumping around and avoiding questions that it was not very helpful.

Honestly, I think one of the things Biden said should just be applied to both candidates when determining who to vote for: “Just take a look at what he says he is, and take a look at what he is.” (I believe this was used in context of Trump’s weight… lol) Both of them have served 4 years in office, and both have done stuff outside of the oval office. It’s easy to see how each of them would spend their terms based on what they already have done.

I’ve seen this in a few places on desktop, and I have no clue why it’s even a feature. I’m not aware of anyone using it anywhere (although to be fair I haven’t thought to ask).

As for why it’s enabled by default, probably for visibility. The easiest way to get people to use a feature is to make them use it and make them explicitly disable it (if even an option). For AI training, they could theoretically just capture typing data and messages regardless of if the feature is enabled/disabled anyway.

“Thieves break into a car in SF” is somehow less surprising than “the grass is green in SF”.

See, it’s democratic as long as people vote for their candidate of choice. Only one candidate? Well, you voted for them at least.

Also, I’m curious why this hasn’t been an issue in the past. Is it Ohio changing the deadline, or the DNC being moved later in the year?

Free federal? Even if your state doesn’t have income tax? Now that sounds quite nice.

Anecdotally, I’ve been hearing from someone who works there that they’ve been doing some blatently illegal things with regards to RTO enforcement and reasons for dismissal in general, including threatening employees who take time off for not “badgeing in” while on vacation. I’m hoping we see some huge fines in the near future on them, as employees raise complaints and even sue them for their practices.

Every single partner I’ve had as well, which is only one, but it happened twice on separate occasions (once outside the US though)…

GPT, at least from my limited understanding, is a tool designed to continue the input. You feed it a sequence of tokens, it returns a tokens which it “believes” come next. While your impression is valid, it’s still a “completion engine”. ChatGPT and other products use GPT but have built a product around it. They are not simply frontends for GPT - they do a lot more processing than that.

Also, not trying to understate your impression. It’s pretty impressive how good it is, despite the compute needed for it. I would caution against overestimating its responses though. It does not “reason”, “think”, etc. Its purpose is to continue a sequence of tokens following a (super complex) pattern it has been trained on (super basically). When it claims to reason something, it’s because the people it trained off of did reason it.

My favorite tests are the ones I don’t need to remember to write. I haven’t needed to write a test for what happens when a function receives null in a while thanks to TS/mypy/C#'s nullable reference types/Rust’s Option/etc. Similarly, I generally don’t need to write tests for functions receiving the wrong type of values (strings vs numbers, for example), and with Rust, I generally don’t even need to write tests for things like thread safety and sometimes even invalid states (since usually valid states can be represented by enum variants, and it’s often impossible to have an invalid state because of that).

There is a point where it becomes too much, though. While I’d like it if the compiler ensured arbitrary preconditions like “x will always be between 2 and 4”, I can’t imagine what kinds of constraints that’d impose on actually writing the code in order to enforce that. Rust does have NonZero* types, but those are checked at runtime, not compile time.

Yep, bias exists everywhere. There’s no avoiding it. Reddit does have the benefit that biases tend to change from sub to sub though. Lemmy instances that I’ve seen (not defederated ones) tend to hold the same FOSS bias, but the intensity of it varies from instance to instance.

This is one of the reasons I like what Beehaw does. Your options are upvote, no vote, and report. Anything worthy of a downvote is worthy of a report.

Agreed, feels like the vast majority of people here are FOSS enthusiasts, which isn’t a bad thing necessarily if you align with them, but definitely a bias and could put off people who genuinely don’t care about FOSS or tech in general.

The Republican party? There is no “conservative party” in the US, and conservatives can exist in both the Republican and Democratic party. In fact, I’d argue that the Republican party more recently has tended towards being (anti-)progressive since they’re constantly trying to push new regulations into law.

The Republican party, especially post-Trump, has been extremely problematic and guided entirely by hate and fearmongering, and I hope we see it disappear someday soon.

I agree, AWS is definitely the largest, but Google and MS are both competing very well in the space for 2nd and 3rd place. On the other hand, no online store front even remotely compares to amazon.com’s presence, so it’s understandable the FTC would have eyes there.

although it uses your biometric data, it’s still a single factor of authentication

Speaking from my experience, I use my phone for biometric authentication. At least from my point of view, I see that as two factors (what I have and what I am) since the biometric authentication only works on my phone.

I am not sure I understood you here. What do you mean by “instead of having each service do their own thing”? Each website using their own method of delivering OTPs?

Basically having multiple places where codes may be generated. This way you can use one location to get OTPs instead of having them delivered via SMS or generated by a different app/service. It ends up being easier and more convenient for the end user (which of course increases adoption).

I guess this has more to do with services adopting OTP generators than sending them via SMS though.

From the perspective of OTPs it makes much more sense to use a separate application (Like Google Authenticator or Aegis Authenticator), preferably on a separate device, to generate the OTPs.

If logging into the password manager to get the password is sufficiently secure (locked behind MFA), then I don’t see the benefit of using a separate OTP generator (aside from maybe if your password manager has a data breach or something, which should be a non-issue except it clearly isn’t thanks to LastPass…)

I’m starting to wonder if phones (or other auth-specific devices) should just become dedicated authentication devices and passwords should just be phased out entirely tbh. Passwords have always had issues because their static nature means if someone learns your password without your knowledge, that method of authentication becomes worthless. The main concern would be what happens when you lose your phone I suppose.

Many password managers use a biometric factor to sign in (your fingerprint, for example, using some kind of auth app if needed). This basically moves the MFA aspect to one service (your password manager) instead of having each service do their own thing. It also comes with the benefits of password managers - each password can be unique, high entropy, and locked behind MFA.

There are a disproportionately large number of people who get one pretty demo and think LLMs are the solution to everything. Even for translations, I’d be interested to see how accurate the major models are in real world scenarios. We’ve been struggling hard to find any practical usage of LLMs that doesn’t require the user to be able to verify the output themselves.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with using HTML/XML-ish format for describing a UI (although having a standardized presentation format that all “viewers/browsers” follow exactly the same way would be nice), I’m just sad that websites have become described as UIs rather than as well-structured documents.