AnyOldName3

You can’t make an LLM only reference the data it’s summarising. Everything an LLM outputs is a collage of text and patterns from its original training data, and it’s choosing whatever piece of that data seems most likely given the existing text in its context window. If there’s not a huge corpus of training data, it won’t have a model of English and won’t know how to summarise text, and even restricting the training data to medical notes will stop mean it’s potentially going to hallucinate something from someone else’s medical notes that’s commonly associated with things in the current patient’s notes, or it’s going to potentially leave out something from the current patient’s notes that’s very rare or totally absent from its training data.

The kind of spoiler tag you used is the kind that doesn’t work on every Lemmy app. Fortunately, that’s not a problem, as I’ve already seen Time Trap, and despite forgetting its name, do sometimes think about it.

Something else worth noting is that instance admins do a lot more moderation than Reddit admins did, so the burden on the moderators for individual communities can be smaller. lemmy.ml in particular has a reputation for having admins who actively intervene a lot.

The interpreter can’t make the replacement until it’s about to execute the line as __bool__ and __len__ are both (Python’s equivalent of) virtual functions, so it’s got to know the runtime type to know if the substitution is valid. Once it’s that late, it’ll often be faster to execute the requested function than work out if it could execute something faster instead. Even with type hints, it’s possible that a subclass with overridden methods could be passed in, so it’s not safe to do anything until the real runtime type is known.

Once there’s a JIT involved, there’s an opportunity to detect the common types passed to a function and call specialised implementations, but I don’t think Python’s JIT is clever enough for this. LuaJIT definitely does this kind of optimisation, though.

That kind of bioplastic tends not to biodegrade naturally, instead requiring a heated industrial composter with specially engineered enzymes added. If it’s disposed of properly, it’s great, otherwise it’s no better than traditional plastic but costs more. Also, not all bioplastics biodegrade at all as all the word means is that the source material is biomass rather than oil.

It’s controlled by whether the stream’s opened in text mode or binary mode. On Unix, they’re the same, but on Windows, text mode has line ending conversion.

Towards the back of the machine normally counts as up for upwards-facing sockets, unless it’s a case with feet on the side, in which case it’ll be away from those feet so the sockets would be the right way up if it were sideways and on the alternative feet.

Also, the overwhelming majority of USB plugs have the logo on the side away from the plastic bit, and sockets have their plastic bits towards the top of the device. You want the plastic bits on opposite sides (as physical objects don’t like to overlap), so that means that if you can feel the logo with your thumb, that side goes up when you plug it in, and you don’t even have to look.

Arch is at least more likely to update to a fixed version sooner, and someone getting something with pacman is going to be used to the idea of it breaking because of using bleeding edge dependencies. The difference with the Flatpak is that most users believe that they’re getting something straight from the developers, so they’re not going to report problems to the right people if Fedora puts a different source of Flatpaks in the lists and overrides working packages with ones so broken as to be useless.

It’s pretty plausible that Epstein would be suicidal after being locked up and would have killed himself if left unattended in his own jail cell with some rope, especially as giving him some rope would signal that he wasn’t going to get saved. The more sensible conspiracy theory is that he was taken off suicide watch intentionally to give him the opportunity.

You can jam the Windows UI by spawning loads of processes with equivalent or higher priority to explorer.exe, which runs the desktop as they’ll compete for CPU time. The same will happen if you do the equivalent under Linux. However if you have one process that does lots of small allocations, under Windows, once the memory and page file are exhausted, eventually an allocation will fail, and if the application’s not set up to handle that, it’ll die and you’ll have free memory again. Doing the same under every desktop Linux distro I’ve tried (which have mostly been Ubuntu-based, so others may handle it better) will just freeze the whole machine. I don’t know the details, but I’d guess it’s that the process gets suspended until its request can be fulfilled, so as long as there’s memory, it gets it eventually, but it never gets told to stop or murdered, so there’s no memory for things like the desktop environment to use.

You’d expect musk of all people to know you need to spend 45 billion to buy the server first.

It doesn’t have to have been effective. They might just have overestimated how many people would think killing health insurance CEOs was unacceptable.

You were the one alluding to historical leftist revolutions over democracies, so if you don’t know what I’m referring to when I say that I’m not aware of that ever happening, that’s an indication that we’re both referring to nothing because it’s never happened. If you don’t know what I’m referring to when I mention right-wing groups overthrowing democracies, there are plenty of examples like Iran in 1953, when the elected government was overthrown by an authoritarian monarchy in a coup backed by Britain and the US. If you don’t know what I’m referring to when I mention right-wing groups taking over after a non-right-wing revolution, then there are lots of examples like Iran in 1979, where a broad coalition overthrew the Shah, then the right-wing religious authoritarian faction had the leaders of other groups assassinated so they could form the new government. The big changes were just which countries Iran was allied with, which music and art was legal, and traditional religious dress for women switching from being banned to being mandated.

The pushback against voting third-party in the US presidential election this year was specifically because the voting block that wanted to vote third party was small enough that even if fully mobilised, it’d still be a third party. Whether or not they were the best option, they’d lose, so they weren’t an option in this particular election, and lesser-of-two-evils voting was more prudent. The campaigning didn’t start soon enough or strong enough, and then totally stopped once the election happened, and it takes more than a few months to build enough support to accomplish anything in an election. That wasn’t a problem with elections specifically, though. If third-party supporters had decided to have a revolution the day after the results were called, it would have failed, too, as not enough people were in favour of the policies, let alone so in favour as to revolt over it.

To my knowledge (which has gaps), there’s never been a leftist revolution over a functioning democracy that left the situation better than it started, so I’m under the impression that we’re in never happened territory whether advocating for reform or revolution. Plenty of right-wing groups have overthrown democracies, though, and plenty of right-wing groups have taken over in the aftermath of non-right-wing revolutions, so there’s a need to make sure there are still enough leftists left alive to still be the majority.

Even if reform is a doomed goal, it’s a more achievable to get the population of a democracy to a point where they could try voting in a leftist government than to throw out everything (and potentially die in the process) and start again. If they lose the vote, then it’s a strong indication that a majority of people participating would be fighting against them in a revolution, and more people need bringing on board. If they win the vote, and still don’t gain power, then it’s a great time to start a revolution, as this is exactly the kind of thing that whips up revolutionary fervour in people who normally would advocate solely for reform. The situation where reform could theoretically happen is a great environment for a revolution if it turns out that reform can’t happen, so it’s easy to pivot if it doesn’t work. It might turn out not to be a doomed goal, though, and they might just end up in power immediately, with state institutions composed of voters who want to believe their votes counted potentially taking the new government’s side if the outgoing government or their supporters didn’t concede.

Either way, the main tool used to keep power in a democracy is to sway public opinion so voters vote against their own interests, and swaying public opinion also works to make people revolt against their own interests or fight against a revolt that’s in their own interests. The debate is moot if half of people read The Daily Mail or watch Fox News, and if there’s a tool that can stop that happening and take away bourgeois power that way, it can probably take it away in other ways.

Historically, plenty of people have gained more rights through actions that were far short of an actual revolution. For example, it would be naive to say that the suffragette bombing campaign didn’t at the minimum accelerate when British women got the vote, but killing four people and wounding twenty-four isn’t a revolution, and women getting the vote moved political power to a group that previously had effectively none. Initially, the only women who had the right to vote were property owners or the wives of property owners, but the same act of parliament gave non-land-owning men the right to vote, so it was specifically transferring power from the Bourgeoisie to workers, too. Clearly, power can be transferred from the Bourgeoisie to workers through reform.

There’s a perfectly legitimate argument that there may or may not be a limit to how far this could go, e.g. whether there’s a threshold minimum amount of power the owning class can tolerate before further reform becomes impossible, or whether if it’s done in palatable increments, reform could continue indefinitely. It’s an unfalsifiable argument, so whether or not it’s true, the only way to know is if it’s done successfully, and until then, there’s a first time for everything might apply (although you could try and fail a whole bunch of times and end up with an upper bound on how easy it might be).

Personally, I think it’s a decent rule of thumb that if you’ve got enough people who agree on the same position to make a revolution successful, you’ve got enough people to get an equivalent government elected if you’re in a vaguely functional democracy. Taking over an existing party or forming a third party that dwarfs all the others should need about the same amount of the population as battling against an incumbent government and any other factions that want to be the last ones standing after a revolution. If you’re not in a democracy at all, then obviously a revolution is necessary, and sometimes a self-described democracy isn’t one or isn’t working properly, so needs some kind of push in the right direction, but if you’re already in a democracy, and not winning elections, a revolution’s likely to backfire, especially as the type of person most keen on using weapons against humans is the same type of person who’ll always put their own needs above the needs of others. Getting loads of people to agree with you is the biggest hurdle both for successful reform and successful revolution.

It might not be strictly Marxist, but it’s an internally-consistent and relatively common viewpoint that people within a liberal democracy could be persuaded to vote so that it becomes a social democracy, then democratic socialism, and then keeps going all the way until it’s communism. I saw it on reddit, so there’s room for doubt, but I’ve read that Marx didn’t think this approach was impossible, just that the starting conditions were less common, and in the era he lived in, autocratic monarchies were the default, and no major countries (based on whatever definition Wikipedia uses) had universal suffrage (if you count women as people) until ten years after he was dead.

That’s reasonable, but the market’s already flooded with generic controllers at various price points and degrees of quality. If the idea’s to make money, the new design won’t do brilliantly as things like the awkwardly-placed trackpads will increase manufacturing costs without being a killer feature that makes most people prefer to spend more on this particular controller. If the idea’s to make something viable that hadn’t been before (which is what Valve normally seem to go for), then this isn’t serving the discontinued Steam Controller’s niche as effectively as the original did, and isn’t serving any new niche, either.

By the way, the thing they were trying at the same time as the original Steam Controller was the Steam Machine, not the Steam Box. It also kind of did work, as the couch PC gaming part mostly happened, but it took a decade of improvements to Proton and abandoning third-party hardware manufacturers before Linux-based console-like PCs became viable in the form of the Steam Deck. Ten years ago, nearly no games ran under Linux, and all the Steam Machine manufacturers were just changing the logo on one of their existing prebuilts and charging an extra $100 not to install Windows on it, so you were better off with any other desktop.

For me, the Deck’s trackpads are half way between my thumb knuckles with my hands in a comfortable position, so they’re not nice to reach for, whereas everything’s a comfortable distance away on the original Steam controller. I have big hands, so maybe you’ve got small hands?

I’m a big Steam Controller trackpad user, and I already nearly never use my Deck trackpads because they’re too low down. This new one just looks like a normal controller with extra bulk, and nonsense in the area no controller except the N64 used because it’s not where most people grow fingers. I guess it’ll at least have paddles, but they’re hardly a unique feature these days. I really just wanted the existing one again, but with more paddles, an option for an integrated battery, USB-C instead of micro B, and an official supply of replacement thumbsticks instead of having to bodge in 8bitdo ones that aren’t quite the same shape.