• iortega
    link
    fedilink
    euskara
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    It is really strange to me they specified “an open source library”

  • Illecors@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not entire sure what the outrage here is. It’s an ML company, not a privacy company. Anyone assuming their daft prompts are private are just naive.

  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I considered whether you can fault them for that, but I do think, I’ll fault them for using Python in a security-relevant context.

    You get so little assistance from the language tooling and a lot of Python libraries have low code-quality. Especially the whole asyncio system is so tricky to use, it’s extremely hard to produce correct code.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The JVM languages (Scala, Java, Kotlin) usually have decent-quality libraries and tooling. The Rust community loves to pump out high-quality stuff. And well, a bit more unusual, but I would have high confidence in Haskell or OCaml libraries, too.

        It’s mainly JavaScript and Python where the whole ecosystem is built from the ground up with a “good enough for my script”-attitude. Oh, and C is out for manually managing memory.

  • PracticalParrot@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    And this… Is why every service I sign up for is given a unique name, email, virtual card. Haven’t figured out a good solution for unique phone number, but everything else is sorted at least.