• 0 Posts
  • 65 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 25th, 2023

help-circle





  • I don’t think OOP’s nature makes them necessary, so much so as it enables them and popular programming principles encourage them. I think they’re a good thing, especially if there’s a way around them in case you can’t get the public interface changed and it doesn’t work for you, especially for performance reasons, but that should be done with care.

    Funny story, when modding Unity games using external modloaders you’re writing C# code that references the game’s assemblies. And with modding you often need to access something that the developers made private/protected/internal. Now, you can use reflection for that, but a different trick you can use is to publicize the game’s assemblies for referencing in your code, and add an attribute to your assembly that tells the runtime to just… Let you ignore the access checks. And then you can just access everything as public.


  • If it was a single question, that does sound lame, my other thought was that those “online polling tools” might not be viable because you can’t put internal company communications into them… But if it’s stuff like food choices or something, then that might also not be a problem.

    That said, my point still stands - what you describe does sound like what I’m saying. If you make a sheet with a dedicated field to put the answer into, it should be possible to reliably automate pulling out answers from all the files with excel-level knowledge, and without any additional sites or servers, just spreadsheet editing software and email.



  • I would argue that memorization is important, but what you memorize and how you arrive at that is very personal. Forcing kids to memorize very specific things, and trying to enforce memorization (as opposed to the ability to arrive at the solution) seems like a bad idea to me.

    I still don’t have the 10x10 multiplication table memorized, and I took physics in high school and work as a programmer. I have a use for knowing number multiples, and have domain-specific numbers memorized (2^8=8*8=256, 256*256=65536), but what I don’t remember off the top of my head I can figure out from the things I do know, from certain tricks, and from brute force mental math juggling numbers.

    And the important thing to me is, I learned what I know not because somebody told me this is how I should do things, but because I picked them up as needed, a mix of memorizing common multiplications and figuring out tricks (like multiples of 9*N for N<11 being the digits N-1 and 10-N)



  • I believe they’ve made the point that it’s not chrome’s fault, but the site’s/user’s - images displayed on websites should be webp to benefit from optimizations for displaying images, but download links should be a different format. The error would be either the user downloading the images from the display instead of the download (including from sites that do not offer images for downloading purposes?), or the website not including separate versions for download where relevant.

    I’m not necessarily sure if that’s a good take, but that’s my interpretation of what’s being said.


  • Apertus was developed with due consideration to Swiss data protection laws, Swiss copyright laws, and the transparency obligations under the EU AI Act. Particular attention has been paid to data integrity and ethical standards: the training corpus builds only on data which is publicly available. It is filtered to respect machine-readable opt-out requests from websites, even retroactively, and to remove personal data, and other undesired content before training begins.

    We probably won’t get better, but sounds like it’s still being trained on scraped data unless you explicitly opt out, including anything that may be getting mirrored by third parties that don’t opt out. Also, they can remove data from the training material retroactively… But presumably won’t be retraining the model from scratch, which means it will still have that in their weights, and the official weights will still have a potential advantage on models trained later on their training data.

    From the license:

    SNAI will regularly provide a file with hash values for download which you can apply as an output filter to your use of our Apertus LLM. The file reflects data protection deletion requests which have been addressed to SNAI as the developer of the Apertus LLM. It allows you to remove Personal Data contained in the model output.

    Oof, so they’re basically passing on data protection deletion requests to the users and telling them all to respectfully account for them.

    They also claim “open data”, but I’m having trouble finding the actual training data, only the “Training data reconstruction scripts”…






  • KubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.detoMemes@sopuli.xyzSo me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    No, wiping it over the machine like a cloth won’t make it work better.

    Ironically, doesn’t it? If you don’t know where the reader and chip are (sometimes it’s not clear), keeping the card close and moving it all over will eventually hit the spot ;D



  • Not when taken to such an extreme so as to obfuscate the meaning and behavior of code, and make it difficult to understand how you would arrive at that code.

    Sane defaults serve to reduce verbosity without obfuscating meaning, simpler syntax with different ordering and fewer tokens reduce verbosity to make the code easier to read by reducing the amount of text you have to pay attention to to understand what the result is.

    I imagine there’s also a distinction to be made between verbosity and redundancy - sometimes extra text might fail to carry information, or carry information that’s already carried elsewhere. I’m not sure where the line should be drawn, because sometimes duplicate information can be helpful, and spacing out information with technically meaningless text has value for readability, but I feel like it’s there.