I can't think of a worse first impression for the new owners of a marketplace that relies on buyer and seller loyalty than taking down the entire platform for weeks without any clear timeline or reasoning.
It also gives the impression that they have no idea how to set up a staging environment or seamlessly migrate to a new backend with a double write approach. Just spells trouble all around.
So many times I have found myself writing the end-user documentation (even after writing tests for the code), and realized that the design should change.
This is the kind of post that makes me log in to hn to give a vote.
It's the same model used for the WebSpeech API, which can operate entirely offline.
Google mostly funded the training of this model around 10 years ago, and it's quite good.
There are many websites that are simple frontends for this model which is built into Webkit and Blink based browsers. However to my knowledge the model is a blob packed into the apps which is not open source, hence the no Firefox support.
At the beginning of your comment I was wondering if the "attitude" that was corporate serving was the anti-ECC stance or the pro-ECC stance (based on the full chunk that you quoted). I'm glad that by the end of the comment you were clearly pro ECC.
Any workstation where you are getting serious work done should use ECC
Every so often over the past 15 years I've had this exact thought, "The world needs something which is exactly like flash. Not kind of like flash, exactly like flash."
A whole generation of people learned how to create art, games, music, animations, using flash, and the same kind of tool hasn't existed since then.
I think Minecraft and Roblox replaced flash for the new generations.
As described in the readme of your repo (did you read it?) your agent found the Knuth paper located one directory level above its working directory.
So, you didn't produce a replication in 47 minutes, it just took around 30 minutes for your agent to find that you had the answer in a PDF in a nearby directory.
sorry, needed to edit this comment to ask the same question as the sibling:
have you run these models in an agent mode that allows for executing the tests, the agent views the output, and iterates on its own for a while? up to an hour or so?
you will get vastly different output if you ask the agent to write 200 of its own test cases, and then have it iterate from there
Yes, most people (including myself) do not understand how modern LLMs work (especially if we consider the most recent architectural and training improvements).
There's the 3b1b video series which does a pretty good job, but now we are interfacing with models that probably have parameter counts in each layer larger than the first models that we interacted with.
The novel insights that these models can produce is truly shocking, I would guess even for someone who does understand the latest techniques.
I use the iOS app daily, and while it's not the prettiest thing in the world, it has nearly every feature of the desktop client, including full scripting support for card contents, which is amazing for things like collapsable elements and media. And, at the end of the day, it's about what you learn from using it that matters.
On mobile you can edit the front and back template.
Anki is a platform, not a content creator. I would be thankful that someome shared their hard work of creating a deck that has all of the content to meet your needs.
For what it's worth, there are many "RTK" decks for Japanese that show english keyword on front and expect you to write the kanji before flipping.
Maybe search for an "RTH" deck to go along with the book Remembering the Hanzi.
Anki is an extremely powerful and feature rich software, and it seems that you barely scratched the surface before dismissing it.
One theory that I've had for a while with regards to the no liquid policy is that it was somehow introduced by the food vendors on the other side of security, who want you to buy a drink and some food after you pass through.
Here's the scenario in question. Your average person with a smartphone, who is not so technically inclined, downloads a game of some sort. The game upon first launch pops up a dialog which says "to provide you with the best experience, we need to clean up temporary files on your device, when prompted by the dialog (screenshot of system dialog), please press 'OK'." The user is then presented with the relatively scary system dialog which says "Allow this app to use system debugging features?", which they have seen 100 times and never understood, decides that this time they will press 'OK'. The game then proceeds to send all of their photos to a malicious actor for whatever purposes.
The average person simply isn't cognizant of the dire security and privacy consequences of many of the things that they do when interacting with a computer.
Note that I am NOT advocated for the removal of ADB. As an Android developer, I once used adb on a daily basis. I also love the idea of using adb to ftp my filesystem to my local machine for the sake of backups and whatever other useful purposes. In the case of the FireTV, I believe that if the device is put into developer mode, ADB can still be accessed over a USB cable. I think this great, and necessary for development and other use cases.
The point here is about making a system less likely to cause incomprehensible harm to the average person. Android and iOS were an opportunity to rethink the security model of computing (for computers that most people carry with them and use every few minutes), and I think that's great.
In the Android security model, this is not a capability that should have ever been provided to apps to begin with. It allows for apps to have almost free reign over the filesystem of other apps (read, write, modify), among other powerful capabilities. No flagship Android phones on the market allow this.
It would be like if the Facebook app on your iOS device could read all of the files of your banking app, or notes app. It's just not something that is enabled in any Android system claiming to have some level of security.
It also gives the impression that they have no idea how to set up a staging environment or seamlessly migrate to a new backend with a double write approach. Just spells trouble all around.