I was deathly afraid it wasn’t as clever as I thought. One however does one’s best.

100%. It’s already centered.

Then who are you fucking?

Cosmopolitan.

I’m reasonably sure I’d lose against him without that premise.

I really like using gnome DE. No software is perfect, and no user interface will suit everyone’s user case though.

The gnome project however has some members that are quite opinionated to the point of being hostile to any criticism or even just opposing opinions.

We have a NeatBoard that’s configured for Zoom. So our stand ups are in front of this TV thing and it works well for us.

Then again, our stand ups are short and to the point. We’re closer to kanban than scrum.

It surprises me. Rather it’s not SELinux it’s userland stuff that reports the wrong error.

Say I try to mount a directory into a podman container and try to read a file. I get some variety of file not found (it’s right there, I can see it) or permission denied error (its permissions are 777) but in reality its label is wrong.

That is 100% comedy gold.

I would have happily told your to 302 see other meeting room.

Yeah, by all means don’t start down what you think might be a dead end, but come back to it once all the other paths have proven to be dead end.

It’s kind of remarkable to see the model really reasoning through the problem like a human

100% bullshit.

the AI achieved its results by “persevering down paths that a human may have dismissed as not worth their time to explore,

So it just auto-completed its way down what a human would have (mistakenly) considered a dead end. Fine, it brute forced it.

a caveat: “While the original proof produced by AI was completely valid, it was significantly improved by the human researchers at OpenAI and the many other mathematicians involved in the present paper. The human still plays a vital role.”

And it produced garbage anyway, which meant it just let the real mathematicians know the assumed dead end was actually useful.

Also known as induced demand. Most of a thing drives more demand for that thing.

Which means the app was crap. Rather the rules it used to validate a valid name are garbage.

Usually because someone tried to be too strict. E.g. names are space delimited A-Za-z strings, rather than just accepting any old Unicode string and safely processing it (e.g. with an SQL prepared statement).

I’ve had websites reject email addresses with one of the newish TLD’s because someone decided they new how to validate an email address (it’s more a more flexible spec than you might think).

That’s conforming (to what ever criteria). Send me a UTF-16 string of at most 100 code points. Send me a 7-bit ASCII string of only A-Z0-9. Reject anything that doesn’t comform.

sanitizing is trying to clean an input. That’s “lemme just double escape some special characters” or stripping/replacing/encoding characters or truncating strings, coercing types. Don’t do this, your sanitization code will have bugs or edge cases.

If they were valid they wouldn’t be rejected.

Running a coffee shop isn’t a fair comparison to a CEO.

A successful coffeeshop requires someone with experience and expertise.

Replacing the Starbucks CEO with an LLM however…

There is a whole board of directors between shareholder and CEO to try too.

Righteous.

Don’t sanitise inputs. Reject non-conforming inputs entirely.

But otherwise: yes.

Spy vs Spy.