vrighter

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

cryptic != complex. Are they cryptic? yes. Are they complex? not really, if you can understand "one or more" or "zero or more" and some other really simple concepts like "one of these" or "not one of these" or "this is optional". You could explain these to a child. It's only because they look cryptic that people think they are complex. Unless you start using backreferences and advanced concepts like those (which are not usually needed in most cases) they are very simple. long != complex

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

it is perfectly descriptive. It is not a forum. I wish it was, but those went pretty much extinct. If they called it a forum it'd be lying

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

a lot of non-criminals do too... what's their point? /s

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

bully for you :)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

the "guardrails" they mention. They are a bunch of if/then statements looking to work around methods that the developers have found to produce undesirable outputs. It doesn't ever mean "the llm will not bo doing this again". It means "the llm wont do this when it is asked in this particular way", which always leaves the path open for "jailbreaking". Because you will almost always be able to ask a differnt way that the devs (of the guardrails, they don't have much control over the llm itself) did not anticipate.

Expert systems were kind of "if we keep adding if/then statements, we would eventually cover all the bases and get a smart, reliable system". That didn't work then. It won't work now either

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (4 children)

yes, "complex" regexes are quite simple too. Complex regexes are long, not difficult. They appear complex because you have to "inline" everything. They really are not that hard.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (7 children)

always read the news before updates. There was one that said manual intervention was needed, and gave you the exact command you needed to run

[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I would support them joining. But of course no fucking tantrums will be tolerated. You will abide by the same rules as everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Don't. It's a horrible overheating piece of crap. I literally cannot shoot more than about 3 minutes of video with the flash turned on (at 1080p, not 4k, and not encoding as hevc either). The phone overheats and turns off the flash.

Keeping the phone in my pocket, out of direct sunlight in my car? I see the "3d buildings have been disabled because your phone needs to cool down" every single day. And I live in Malta; in the summer it's a 20 minute trip, at most.

And even then, the battery life sucks anyway.

Android 16 is buggy af too, though that's not specific to the 7a.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

does the regex search for what you wanted to? Does it work in all cases? Can I be confident that it will find all instances i care about, or will I still have to comb the code manually?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

tests can never prove correctness of code. All they can prove is "the thing hasn't failed yet". Proper reasoning is always needed if you want a guarantee.

If you had the llm write the regex for you, I can practically guarantee that you won't think of, and write tests for, all the edge cases.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (9 children)

that would be more believable if they didn't release the apple vision pro.

Or the years they took biding their time before they finally implemented battery charge time estimation on ios.

Or the time biding their time refining, erm, copy and paste?

Come on!

view more: ‹ prev next ›