kurikuri

8 ms·

1.
by kurikuri 9mo ago
I agree, the applet which google plageurized through its Gemini tool saves you money. Why keep the middle man though? At this point, just pirate a copy.
2.
by kurikuri 9mo ago
Someone making a complain does not imply that they were ok with it prior to the complaint. Why are you muddying the waters?
3.
by kurikuri 9mo ago
> > or the CCP route (clip the wings of the Icaruses who fly too high). > This seems like a great way for the monied interests from WITHIN the party to just take full control. They already do in the US, so this is a non-response.
4.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> I do know, however, that if you take private data from your employer and leak it (or sell it) you’re not going to be on the right side of the law. I have a hard time buying this article’s point that it was just “violating company polic
5.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> When ever i see "never implement your own...", i know i want to implement it myself. Doing stuff for learning is useful, and the intent behind this general phrase is to not ‘implement your own’ something which is both hard an
6.
by kurikuri 1y ago
What? You’ve managed to mangle so many terms in so few words… Signatures can refer to two things: integrity checks on a file or authentication checks for a recieved file. In the integrity check situation a hash function (e.g., SHA) is often
7.
by kurikuri 1y ago
The U2 album was odd, but not bad in the same league. Apple didn’t advertise for you to purchase U2’s music. As an end user, what made it annoying was how the U2 album was part of your library (thus, would show up in shuffle, etc.) and remo
8.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> Judges were using injunctions to avoid putting their name behind a ruling. What? That makes no sense. You can lookup which court and judge (or panel of judges) issued the injunctions. I do not understand why this non-existent anonymity
9.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Oof, I don’t like this article much at all. The first two major points they pose against email can be summed up as ‘people don’t use security unless it is by default, and because it wasn’t built-in to email we shouldn’t try.’ To which I res
10.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Ah, I was being a bit sarcastic in my response to monkeyelite, I believe I understood what you wrote and was trying to get at the vacuity of their response to you. I derailed this conversation to make a meta point, and it wasn’t your fault
11.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> Yes I don’t believe in unbiased sources. I believe in multiple perspectives revealing aspects of the truth. Sure, I agree with what you’ve stated here. > Correct. And I don’t buy the dichotomy you are framing of biased companies vs
12.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Nuance is not always a good thing. This type of nuance doesn’t forward the discussion in any way and, in this case, muddies the waters and leads to some odd implications. Sure, we can say there is no objective source of truth and chastise
13.
by kurikuri 1y ago
They were likely in a homogeneous population when they committed the crime that got them there in the first place, so that confounder might not matter much at all.
14.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> … but I think it’s fair to say that many people don’t want DOGE to be serious about catching Medicare fraud. That’s a leap (if I’m being charitable). I think you could state that most people don’t trust DOGE, especially given DOGE’s ap
15.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> On the flip side, it will be incompetent and demotivated. This sounds like it came from someone who has never spent more than a passing interaction with government employees. The government employees I’ve worked with seem to actually c
16.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Right, so the LLM needs some randomness to make that decision. The LLM performs a series of deterministic operations until it needs the randomness to make this decisions, there is no randomness within the LLM itself.
17.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> Your guy lost, learn from your mistakes and carry on. Or criticize both presidents equally. So, your solution here is for people who think the current administration is particularly bad to either not complain or accept any whataboutism
18.
by kurikuri 1y ago
This feels like a flippant response. The question you responded to was ‘would the hash of the iris would be the same?’ It isn’t as if you’ll get an identical image of the iris every time, and hashes tend to behave chaotically for even sligh
19.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> But it can easily assign equal scores to 1 and 0 and zero to other tokens, and you’ll have to sample it randomly to produce the result. Whether you consider it external or internal doesn’t matter, transformers are inherently probabilis
20.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Except the ostensible motive of the government is to serve its people, whereas the company’s motive is either those of the people who control the company or profit. Even then, if the government is weak than the ‘more power over you’ is simp
21.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> For example, going to college for 4 years to get a physics degree doesn’t make much sense at my age, because there’s not much time left for the payoff. That is tragic! Learning more about things is fulfilling in and of itself. If your
22.
by kurikuri 1y ago
So, what ‘algorithms’ are you talking about? The randomness comes from the input value (the random seed). Once you give it a random seed, a special number generator (PRNG) makes a sequence from that seed. When the LLM needs to ‘flip a coin,
23.
by kurikuri 1y ago
In the first definition of D(P,Q), the author dropped a p_j within the sum.
24.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Ironically, trust is an issue in the crypto space (the general layman perspective seems to be one of rug pulls and greater fool fallacies). The existence of some transparent information that is easy for a layman to use and understand makes
25.
by kurikuri 1y ago
This false equivalency, if you honestly believe it, is shallow at best. The ‘left’ has identified speech that is likely used to belittle or negate someone else’s existence and will appropriately label it as hate speech. Any structural chang
26.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> I'm sure there's a market, but exactly what is this genuine need and do they really understand their own problem? Unfortunately, my information stops at the fact that they claim to need the high-output entropy source. >
27.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> Fast key erasure uses symmetric cipher. If there's a mathematical attack on that, then you just don't have any symmetric cipher The generation of the RNG’s output stream is the result of a symmetric cipher, yes, but an atta
28.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Most people do not need high throughput entropy sources, sure. But the people who do pay quite a bit for that functionality. I also haven’t seen any oft-referred literature describing metastability do so using a quantum-physics context. The
29.
by kurikuri 1y ago
> If the OS RNG needs fresh entropy it can reseed with fresh entropy from various sources as it does today and use fast key erasure for forward resistance. This assumes that the OS has access to a source of entropy that replenishes itsel
30.
by kurikuri 1y ago
Keeping the DRBG’s state (seed material) secure for the duration of its use is the problem. If this state is leaked, depending on the type of leak, then anything generated from that DRBG is now not protected. Even worse, you may not even kn

More ›