Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | VortexLain's commentslogin

Oh yes, let's induce regulatory capture and ban open-weight models in the name of alignment.

During Iran shutdowns I've been researching what ways Iranians manage to get to the internet by mimicking as whitelisted resources (such as hcapcha). ChatGPT had refused to lookup information written in Farsi since "circumventing state regulation is a crime".

Now this is very bad, as bad as it can get. As soon as all local services will stop working in sanctioned countries, those countries' governments will force all users to either install a root certificate or lose access to all local services and websites. And then it will be possible to use that root certificate for MITM attacks. In the worst case scenario, after the majority of users will install the root certificate, state DPIs will MITM all traffic and will block all un-MITMable traffic.

Sounds like the sanctions worked.

Don't understand why you have been downvoted. Russian government have already attempted to push forward their root certificate for banking using Yandex browser, now this.

I really hope this will have proper GNU/Linux support, otherwise it will end up the same way Qualcomm ARM PCs did.

guaranteed it will be like Qualcomm arm, it's a partnership with Microsoft after all. we may see a community project to make Linux work on it but it will not have an official first class support and many things will likely not work properly.

Starting with the days of Siri, i've been evaluating all chatbots of that nature by writing them a meaningless string of text and seeing how they answer. GPT-3 was the first system which instead of refusing to answer or answering meaninglessly has identified that the string of text has no sense.

You could have told the guard you're going to a competitive programming contest.

It was a non-competitive hackathon - different groups working on related project s get together to promote inter-group relationships.

Programming conference

Sure. I had something like that planned. But that doesn't change the title of the event.

The title might be XYZ Hackathon but the word Hackathon isn't really meaningful outside of that scene, so if asked what it is, you'd say a computer programming conference or something like that. When I tell people about Revision, I don't say "demoparty", I say "computer art festival", because that's not subculture jargon.

And if the border guard asks for the name of the computer art festival, to check if it exists?

it's called Revision and the website is https://revision-party.net

Which doesn't contain "hack" in the title.

Ladybird going source-available is quite unfortunate, seems like Gecko is the only production-ready independent browser engine we're left with.

They may, at this point, go ahead and remove "get involved" block from their website https://ladybird.org/, since it's not possible to contribute anymore.


That's not source-available, that's still open-source. Quoting Wikipedia:

> Source-available software is software released through a source code distribution model that includes arrangements where the source can be viewed, and in some cases modified, but without necessarily meeting the criteria to be called open-source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software

> Open-source software (OSS) is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose. Open-source software may be developed in a collaborative, public manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software

And as said here, SQLite was operating like this forever.


It's not source available, source available implies some restrictions on what you can do with the source, or with any resulting binaries. This isn't a rugpull; all they're doing is closing off contributions, which has nothing to do with the license of the code.

This is not the same as source available - you can fork it, the license didn't change.

Recently, GitHub has changed their terms of service to use all user data for AI training unless users explicitly opt out. This is probably the way Microsoft has obtained "appropriately licensed data".

this is almost certainly too recent to have been used for training data, no? Unless they optimistically included most repos somehow?

> The mechanical actions and the physical presence really helps in retention of the materials. Although this is the case for many people, I personally struggle to process information and write it on paper at the same time. Thus, I strongly prefer digital note-taking and use Obsidian or just vim instead of paper.


I'm not trying to be offensive, but I don't see how typing it into a computer is significantly different than writing it on paper.

Is there something stopping you, or anyone from writing it down and taking notes in class and then reviewing it later as needed? Not just process it in lecture time, but regurgitate it to physical form for later review.

Also, I would definitely constrain this into educational groups, where K-6 are much different from college (post mandatory) education.


If I may, people write (with pens) slower than than can speak, and thus to take good notes you need to synthesize the material you are being explained. You need to understand what you're writing.

Many people can type as fast/faster than they talk, and when typing it is possible to try and type verbatim what is being said. In this case, there is no understanding. (If you've ever taken a class not all that is said is pertinent and not all that is pertinent is said)

I personally don't revisit my written notes their purpose is uniquely for me to remember/understand what I've written.


I highly doubt this is unique. Some teachers (at least when I was in school) said stuff, repeated it, no problem writing it verbatim. Some others put it on the board for you to copy it verbatim, and later in uni.. most people definitely did not type fast enough to capture every word.

Writing down stuff has always been what you make of it.


Just because there arepeople who type slow doesnt invalidate the point that typing has a much higher speed ceiling. It's like saying well cars can go slower than some people who walk. So we may as well walk everywhere.

"Many people can type as fast/faster than they talk"

No they can't. An amazing typist is 120 wpm. A slow speaker might be 150 wpm and fast talkers over 300 wpm.


Except you don't talk full speed like a california girl on speed during a lecture?

>I don't see how typing it into a computer is significantly different...

I haven't read up on it much myself, but any discussion along the lines of this subthread re: "handwriting > typing" is probably discussing research that's starting to be talked about more and more in the past 5 years or so (maybe the pandemic and online learning accelerated interest?)

here's a 5m clip of a neuroscientist presenting to the US Senate this year on correlation between dropping academic performance and use of tech in classrooms in many countries over many years, and asking for more research into mechanisms and causation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd-_VDYit3U

and here's a paper from a couple years ago describing differences in observed brain activity between handwriting and typewriting and some discussion of how this could be a mechanism of the kind the video was talking about https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10....

>Is there something stopping you from...

No, but I feel like it's not hard to argue that default are important.


And the only way to win this lottery is by using an automated script that starts sending automated requests as soon as the new day starts at Beijing time.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: