sukhmel

joined 2 years ago
[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm not trying to legitimise anything, but when I try to convince such people, I usually fail, that's why I brought it up. Yes it's weaponising fear and it's the same irrational beliefs that make people racist or nazi, and a lot of other things, I think

Regarding the sources, I think it's stories like this or this that makes them worry, don't know if sources are credible, first one looks pretty fake.

nitpickbesides, I didn't say

used cross-dressing as the primary way

it can be opportunistic, not modus operandi, I only think that this is realistic because statistically speaking there are enough abusers on the planet so that at least some could try doing that

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

There's also some women that were so traumatised by experience with men that they are afraid trans women will attack women, and creeps will claim they are trans to elude punishment. I think this is a real problem, but much rarer than it may seem, and it's not a good enough reason to say that trans women don't/shouldn't exist. Maybe it's because I'm too privileged to understand

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago

Because it's a computer banana and the mascot is real? I don't know, this makes no sense, but I can see how sometimes this kind of mix can work

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago

We did this to the Arrival, too.

light spoiler :::the first subtitles are almost at the very end of the movie, so it was too late to bother. Also, most of us watched it before, but man was it a letdown.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago

MacOS does this, but on screen recording it never shows it. Feels good to see Linux records what user actually saw

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I meant 'make sense' to mean 'could rewrite without garbage'. Maybe I was wrong, anyway

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I'm afraid, LLMs are gone a bit further from the state when such 'poisoning' made sense.

I'm afraid that soon this may reach a point where it will be easier for LLM to make sense of the text, than for a human, if this idea gets further development.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago

but what else could be representative /s

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 4 points 7 months ago

once the tool no longer works, you

… try every trick to make it look like it works, blame everyone for not using it, blame everything for not working the way it should, break some things that are made with other tools that work for a good measure (it was their fault for being too arrogant, anyway)

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 4 points 7 months ago

Reminds me of one site that said I shouldn't use 'git secret' because reasons. I've spent quite some time to find what do they propose to use instead (that wasn't as straightforward as in this article), turns out they provide a 'solution' that includes their partners' system to manage secrets. Another bullshit, in other words

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You got me, I decided to read the article later (I hope to, at least). But your summary looks about right, I don't really expect C++ to become much safer than it is now, which is not very much. Should take a look at profiles, I love a good laugh

Edit: looked up those ``profiles'', it looks like a vague and complicated proposal that will require an unrealistic amount of undertaking. But that might be seen as being in the spirit of C++

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Later: short summary of the conclusion of what the committee does (read 307 minutes)

view more: ‹ prev next ›