Isn't that the most stupid idea ever because of the arsonists that now have incentives to burn for money? "I'll bet it will burn over there next week" alike.
They only found out about it and might have believed that this Mythos-class-Models are somewhat more safe because of the filters - which that demonstrated they are not when jailbreaking taken into account.
I don't think it's a good idea to give the crowds that kind of weapon. The first thing they'd do is "liberate" the model aka remove guardrails and safetly-protocols and brag on X / reddit with it and throw it into the public. That's only cool for a geek that doesn't think about the ethical impact of such a move. You'd basically become responsible for anything that is done with it, forever - have a good sleep. /s
I know the cult which is a humane community, that 's the point - but this standalone thing without any background is what i described. There is no: in respectful memorial and with <3 and respect to him, or did i miss something? You can not assume, that anybody knows enough at that point how its presented. At least giving a ton of background-links to go down that rabbithole for the reader himself would be the least.
The treatment of the mentally ill and the vulnerable is a good metric for the society you live in. And if in digital nowadays you'd be mocked more than your lifetime, i think i had a point.
You'd not only suffer till death from it - you'd be made fun of forever, which is really not, what anybody should participate in.
I don't like the way it is presented as an achievement in wasm-conversion and at the same time presenting the psychological bad state of the origin author and making fun of him by stating like: "if it's slow, it's not my fault, it's the CIA".
This is beyond resepectless and shameless to the bones. I don't care about that converted code, what i see is an embarresment.
The specific video is also picked for that reason: to let the deceased developer look bad and make fun of him.
Another clear example that intellectual capacity or intelligence does not develop ethics or compassion as a byproduct on the way - or even was to expect from a developer these days.
At least, the author didn't camouflage anything and stands straight up with that attitude in front of the rest of the world.
This website doesn't even comply with general basic standards for imprint and responsible persons and firms behind it. So if i proxy this misbehaviour to the rest of the whole: european answer-claim ... and the nameservers are on cloudflare. goodbye.
I remember a video where they went through scyscrapers zooming into a room, where life was moving on and there was a screen inside a room and there was something running on it. I never understood how this was tanked. It was revolutionary.
The subscribers to simulations from the pr0n-industry and the billions of lonely humanoids will suffocate in their VR-headsets, if we don't think about sensors to watch their oxygen-levels.
Back in the day it was Windows, that had a hard limit on how long it could run in one pass. I forgot when it began and ended, but happily AI helped out to investigate back in time.
The bug primarily affected the Windows 9x family of operating systems:
Windows 95 (all versions)
Windows 98 (original release)
Windows 98 Second Edition (SE)
While there were separate reports of similar 497-day overflows in Windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2000, the "classic" version of this bug that most people remember is the 49.7-day limit on Windows 95 and 98.
Why 49.7 days?
The issue was a classic integer overflow. Windows used a 32-bit counter to track the number of milliseconds since the system started.
This counter was used by the Virtual Device Driver (VMM) to manage system timers.
The maximum value for a 32-bit unsigned integer is: 2^32 - 1, which equals: 4,294,967,295 millisec.
If you convert those milliseconds into days: 4,294,967,295 / 1,000 = 4,294,967 seconds
4,294,967 / 60 / 60 / 24 ~ 49.71 days
When the counter hit that maximum value, it would "wrap around" to zero. Because many system services and drivers were waiting for the counter to increase to a certain target time, they would suddenly find themselves waiting for a number that had already passed or was now mathematically impossible to reach in their logic. This caused the "hang"—the mouse might still move, but the OS could no longer process tasks.
When did it start and end?
Started: With the release of Windows 95 in August 1995.
Ended: Microsoft officially fixed the bug with a patch in 1999 (Knowledge Base article KB216641). Windows Me (released in 2000) was the first in that specific family to ship with the fix included, and the transition to the Windows NT architecture (Windows XP and later) eventually rendered the specific underlying cause obsolete for home users.