utopiah

To be fair I think that’s a very harsh depiction of the events. It’s totally lacking the perspective of the shareholder. They were promised money and they have emotions too. Google shareholders deserve better representation! /$ obviously

Eh… I have one and use it. What are you monsters using, a spoon?! /s

They don’t want to wake up until they have something else more appealing to put their money on. They NEED something to invest. They don’t care what it is, or even if it works but it has to be plausible enough to make money, more money. Until there is another scam to put their money in, they are stuck in the bubble, like us.

Just have to ask nicely. 🐙 (for people confused en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diving_regulator#Octopus )

tips fedora

FWIW (and I know it’s not the joke…) it’s perfectly fine to remove the mouth piece while scuba diving. In fact it’s part of basic training. You should be able to remove the mouth piece and take another one, your octopus or the one of your buddy, in case there is an incident. No… the real question for a good diver is how the heck you’re going to say HDMI 2.1 with hand signs! /s

Addressed earlier in lemmy.world/post/39884328/20912060

Is there a way to verify that? I remember Mozilla pushed for webcompat.com so wondering if this can be used to see the pace of change.

It renders… so what is missing for you to use it?

Open an issue to explain why it’s not enough for you? If you can make a PR for it that actually implements the things you need? My point to say everything is already out there and perfectly fits your need, only that a LOT is already out there. If all re-invent the wheel in our own corner it’s basically impossible to learn from each other.

If I understand correctly then this means mostly adapting the interface?

Sure, you’re right, I just worry (maybe needlessly) about people re-inventing the wheel because it’s “easier” than searching without properly understand the cost of the entire process.

FWIW that’s a good question but IMHO the better question is : What kind of small things have you vibed out that you needed that didn’t actually exist or at least you couldn’t find after a 5min search on open source forges like CodeBerg, Gitblab, Github, etc? Because making something quick that kind of works is nice… but why even do so in the first place if it’s already out there, maybe maintained but at least tested?

I agree… but beside the point I have access to a dedicated workshop and a tool library www.tournevie.be which challenges this whole setup. It’s relatively unique though, unfortunately, so your example still stands, thanks for sharing.

Yep. That’s exactly why I tend to never discuss “AI” with people who don’t have to actually have a PhD in the domain, or at least a degree in CS. It’s nothing against them specifically, it’s only that they are dangerously repeating what they heard during marketing presentations with no ability to criticize it and, in such cases, it can be quite dangerous. TL;DR: people who could benefit from it don’t need it, people who would shouldn’t.

Mostly because the model is incapable There, fixed that for you.

That’s their question too, what the hell did Google makes this the default, as opposed to limiting it to the project directory.

Because “agentic”. IMHO running commands is actually cool, doing it without very limited scope though (as he did say in the video) is definitely idiotic.

Well… at least do that for Windows and MacOS, not for Linux.

Because people who runs this shit precisely don’t know what containers, scope, permissions, etc are. That’s exactly the audience.

The user can choose whether the AI can run commands on its own or ask first. That implies the user understands every single code with every single parameters. That’s impossible even for experience programmers, here is an example : rm *filename versus rm * filename where a single character makes the entire difference between deleting all files ending up with filename rather than all files in the current directory and also the file named filename. Of course here you will spot it because you’ve been primed for it. In a normal workflow then it’s totally difference. Also IMHO more importantly if you watch the video ~7min the clarified the expected the “agent” to stick to the project directory, not to be able to go “out” of it.

It should also be sandboxed with hard restrictions that it cannot bypass duh… just using it in a container and that’s it. It won’t blue pill its way out.

I think that’s the point, the “agent” (whatever that means) is not running in a sandbox. I imagine the user assumed permissions are small at first, e.g. single directory of the project, but nothing outside of it. That would IMHO be a reasonable model. They might be wrong about it, clearly, but it doesn’t mean they explicitly gave permission.

Wow… who would have guessed. /s Sorry but if in 2025 you believe claims from BigTech you are a gullible moron. I genuinely do not wish data loss on anyone but come on, if you ask for it…