WalnutLum

joined 2 years ago
[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 21 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (3 children)

In 2001 when The US authorized use of force on Al-Qaeda that, along with The 1973 war powers resolution gave the president (as in the position of president, not just Bush) unlimited ability to bomb anyone loosely associated with Al-Qaeda in perpetuity.

It's what allowed Bush, then Obama, then Trump, and then Biden, and now Trump again, to use the military as they see fit for performing military operations against basically any state and group in the middle east.

This is sadly likely the least impeachable thing he's done in office.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 14 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

In 2001 when The US authorized use of force on Al-Qaeda that, along with The 1973 war powers resolution gave the president (as in the position of president, not just Bush) unlimited ability to bomb anyone loosely associated with Al-Qaeda in perpetuity.

It's what allowed Bush, then Obama, then Trump, and then Biden, and now Trump again, to use the military as they see fit for performing military operations against basically any state and group in the middle east.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wasn't the National Guard the people who shot those kids at Kent State?

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm no expert, but usually when missiles "go ballistic" their engines turn off and they have limited maneuvering capability at the end of their flight.

This one looks like it had engines on all the way to the target, which is a fairly newer class of design.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago

Shepherd my love!

I've used SystemD for years and the pure joy writing system initialization units in Scheme gives me can't be overstated.

Seriously, a lot of times I feel like I stick with Guix's many problems just for shepherd.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Soooooo... Kind of...

I didn't check the cargo numbers but for Crewed missions we have some nice estimates from the OIG in 2024 based on the crew program development costs and the built-in 6 flight missions we got for the contracts:

-SpaceX Dragon ~ 55 million/seat

-Boeing Starliner ~ 90 million/seat

-Russia Soyuz ~ 86 million/seat

-Space Shuttle ~ 87 million/seat (adjusted for inflation)

Soyuz was ~ 20 million a seat in 2007, 2013 it was ~ 55 million a seat, and 2014-2018 it was 62 million a seat, now it's that 86 number.

Funny thing is happening at SpaceX recently, namely NASA used up all 6 flights that were 55 million a seat, so they needed to extend for flights 7-9 and 10-14

In February 2022 NASA Extended their contract with SpaceX for flights 7-9 at around 258 million per flight (so ~64.5 million per seat) and again in June 2022 for flights 10-14 at 288 million per flight (so ~72 million per seat)

So SpaceX came out of the gate with their handfuls of investor cash and subsidized the original contracts, but they're likely rapidly increasing prices now that they've burned through most of that runway.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago

I have also been done in many times by git-filter-repo. My condolences to the chef.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago

Outdated image, everything goes through palantir now

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

"sorry you haven't paid your monthly driver's permit fee" Car drops out of the sky

 

This seems like it's a less-than-positive development for running AI on consumer-grade hardware.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There's a lot of assumptions about the reliability of the LLMs to get better over time laced into that...

But so far they have gotten steadily better, so I suppose there's enough fuel for optimists to extrapolate that out into a positive outlook.

I'm very pessimistic about these technologies and I feel like we're at the top of the sigma curve for "improvements," so I don't see LLM tools getting substantially better than this at analyzing code.

If that's the case I don't feel like having hundreds and hundreds of false security reports creates the mental arena that allows for researchers to actually spot the non-false report among all the slop.

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

It found it 8/100 times when the researcher gave it only the code paths he already knew contained the exploit. Essentially the garden path.

The test with the actual full suite of commands passed in the context only found it 1/100 times and we didn't get any info on the number of false positives they had to wade through to find it.

This is also assuming you can automatically and reliably filter out false negatives.

He even says the ratio is too high in the blog post:

That is quite cool as it means that had I used o3 to find and fix the original vulnerability I would have, in theory, done a better job than without it. I say ‘in theory’ because right now the false positive to true positive ratio is probably too high to definitely say I would have gone through each report from o3 with the diligence required to spot its solution.

 

Looking for an alternative to tiles.

I realize lowjacking your stuff is kind of against the idea of privacy in the first place, but the convenience of being able to find lost items is big.

Are there any other locators that can use cellular service or just use BLE?

view more: next ›