HackerLangs
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

calibas

4,353 カルマ登録 11 年前

投稿

Active phishing campaign targeting crates.io users

blog.rust-lang.org
29 ポイント·投稿者 calibas·10 か月前·1 コメント

コメント

calibas
·11 時間前·議論
> one of the V3A animations reminds me loosely of things I saw when I was a kid, at night, shortly before I slept

Hypnagogic hallucinations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnagogia
calibas
·7 日前·議論
The largest tree on record is rejected in part because it's over the theoretical limit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nooksack_Giant

Too bad we cut it down, along with almost every other giant Douglas-fir.
calibas
·先月·議論
There's evidence creatine may raise DHT levels, and DHT causes hair thinning: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19741313/
calibas
·2 か月前·議論
Our long term plan is for Jesus to come back and fix everything.

I wish I was joking...
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
If the photography was mediocre, nobody would accuse it of being AI, but because it's the flawless photography of a true professional, suddenly it's highly suspect.
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
I notice the article, the paper, and the "plain language" summary of the paper don't mention the common term for this phenomenon, St Elmo's fire.
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
I was playing around with this recently, but the problem I encountered is that most AI analysis techniques like stem separation aren't built to work in real-time.
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
Yeah, that seems like an odd thing to say.

It's like they're setting themselves up for a "no true Scotsman" argument. Anybody who disagrees with their decisions isn't a "true believer" in open source.
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
I get what you're saying, but I disagree that LLMs should be inserting ads into git commits.

By default, the LLM is credited with authorship anyway, and I assume the user can easily just remove the ad, though I don't use Copilot.
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
You're conflating two different things. When an LLM writes a commit, it should take credit. I see nothing wrong with it adding:

> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 [email protected]

Compare that to the message the article is talking about:

> Quickly spin up Copilot coding agent tasks from anywhere on your macOS or Windows machine with Raycast (https://gh.io/cca-raycast-docs).

It's not just mentioning it was written via Copilot, it's explicitly advertising for another product.
calibas
·3 か月前·議論
It was largely replaced with it's molecular analog, BPS.

Just like BPA, BPS is an endocrine disruptor. The idea that it's less harmful than BPA is mostly due to lack of research.
calibas
·4 か月前·議論
Everyone's being diplomatic, including most of the HN comments.

This seems to be the simplest compromise, and allows OpenTTD to continue existing without too many problems from Atari, so people don't want to make waves.
calibas
·4 か月前·議論
I'm confused, you think I'm saying he's breaking guidelines?

I should have been more clear, but I was trying to skirt the guidelines. I'm sure that astroturfing happens on HN, and I think that not allowing people to talk about it actually helps enable astroturfing.
calibas
·4 か月前·議論
> I've seen no one working on this, and in fact most people on HN seem to be working on ways to further exacerbate this problem.

It's against the HN guidelines to insinuate that astroturfing happens on HN.
calibas
·4 か月前·議論
If I boycott a company, am I legally responsible for any lost profit that happens as a result?
calibas
·5 か月前·議論
Calling it a "mystery" gets suckers like me to click the link.
calibas
·5 か月前·議論
If it's not clear already, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not using strict legal definitions.
calibas
·5 か月前·議論
Yep, that's the exact "loophole" I mentioned in my original comment!

The government can now partner with private businesses to effectively bypass the Fourth Amendment.
calibas
·5 か月前·議論
You seem to be playing dumb here. You realize us "normal people" believe the Bill of Rights is to protect us from the government, and the 4th means the government doesn't get to spy on everybody indiscriminately?

And yes, they are spying on everybody. They have access to things like cellphone metadata, which to a normal human being is a very clear violation of privacy.

It's also my firm belief that our legal system has been undermining these basic concepts for decades now. It benefits the federal government to make this all very vague, as if modern technology suddenly means you have no expectation of privacy anymore. They've also mixed in some of that wonderfully authoritarian "for purposes of national security".

There's actual lawyers saying these same things, if you'd like someone to properly debate with.
calibas
·5 か月前·議論
You're an attorney and you're asking me why the government spying on everyone is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment?