lad

I meant ‘make sense’ to mean ‘could rewrite without garbage’. Maybe I was wrong, anyway

I’m afraid, LLMs are gone a bit further from the state when such ‘poisoning’ made sense.

I’m afraid that soon this may reach a point where it will be easier for LLM to make sense of the text, than for a human, if this idea gets further development.

but what else could be representative /s

once the tool no longer works, you

… try every trick to make it look like it works, blame everyone for not using it, blame everything for not working the way it should, break some things that are made with other tools that work for a good measure (it was their fault for being too arrogant, anyway)

Reminds me of one site that said I shouldn’t use ‘git secret’ because reasons. I’ve spent quite some time to find what do they propose to use instead (that wasn’t as straightforward as in this article), turns out they provide a ‘solution’ that includes their partners’ system to manage secrets. Another bullshit, in other words

You got me, I decided to read the article later (I hope to, at least). But your summary looks about right, I don’t really expect C++ to become much safer than it is now, which is not very much. Should take a look at profiles, I love a good laugh

Edit: looked up those ``profiles’', it looks like a vague and complicated proposal that will require an unrealistic amount of undertaking. But that might be seen as being in the spirit of C++

Later: short summary of the conclusion of what the committee does (read 307 minutes)

This is almost what I need for my ancient meme folder

Got it. I agree that their drivers are (were?) of exemplary bad quality

But I don’t think that it is realistically possible to drop all the proprietary firmware blobs, and if it’s not maybe it’s better to not actively sabotage something to ‘avoid those being feasible’?

What’s the reason to avoid binary blob drivers being feasible? Is that about not being able to use non-free binary blobs in kernel? I don’t quite understand what it even is about

No, not this time, at least

it’s for the French locale

True, there is a spectrum of options, and some will work much better than what we have now. It’s just that when I read about holding people accountable I don’t quite imagine it’s going to be implemented in the optimal way, not in the first hundred years or so

That’s just covering up, like a disclaimer that your software is intended to only be used on 29ᵗʰ of February. You don’t expect anyone to follow that rule, but you expect the court to rule that the user is at fault.

Luckily, it doesn’t always work that way, but we will see how it turns out this time

with billions of dollars in losses

But the real question we should be asking ourselves is “how much did tops saved over the course of the years without proper testing”

It probably is what they are concerned about, and I really wish I knew the answer to this question.

I think, this is absolutely not the way to do business, but maybe that’s because I don’t have one ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This might help in some regard, but this will also create a bottleneck of highly skilled highly expensive Engineers with the accountability certificate. I’ve seen what happens when this is cornerstone even without the accountability that would make everything even more expensive: the company wants to cut expenses so there’s only one high level engineer per five or so projects. Said engineer has no time and no resources to dig into what the fuck actually happens on the projects. Changes are either under reviewed or never released because they are forever stuck in review.

On the other hand, maybe we do move a tad bit too fast, and some industries could do with a bit of thinking before doing. Not every software company should do that, though. To continue on the bridge analogy, most of software developers are more akin to carpenters even if they think about themselves as of architects of buildings and bridges. If a table fails, nothing good is going to happen, and some damage is likely to occur, but the scale is very different from what happens if a condo fails

Lol, that would feel like world-scale schizophrenia¹, you know something happens, but there’s no proof it’s real

Well, you can make daily a torture, too

But really, feels good when there’s time to actually work instead of just talk

No, that was what I meant, I thought they didn’t, I was wrong, it turned out

Made easier to use like in when their codebase was leaked and no one had successfully built a game from it?

in-house tools often encourage making a mess heavily reliant on those tools or working around their limitations, in my experience