"Or" means at least one of multiple alternatives. Alteratives contrast with each other, they differ. Of course, the original author could be repeating the same thing for emphasis, but more likely they are saying two different things. Since the second thing is discrimination, the first thing, "DEI", must necessarily not be discrimination. If they merely wanted you to not discriminate, they could have just said "follows federal anti discrimination laws" which are quite stringent.
They are saying the same thing twice. They repeat themselves specifically because certain groups hold a strong belief that "discrimination" only goes one-way, and have effectively twisted the meaning of the word in their minds.
The explicit mention of DEI is a way of saying "yes, that means ALL kinds of discrimination, including the kinds you may believe are morally correct".
That may be what they mean, but it is a sufficiently dubious interpretation that one can't reasonably use it to obtain the funding unless clarification is provided by the administration.
libera.chat servers are hosted by volunteers. Most of the libera.chat infra are the the same servers which were switched from freenode in 2021.
Existence of the non-profit in Sweden changes nothing, that entity can be closed without any adverse effect for the IRC.
I define somebody as a zealot by their expression. Fanaticism, generalizations, editorial practices like misconstruing with the goal of tearing down a straw men, and even others.
If you show me Rust advocates with comments like these I would be happy to agree that there are in fact Rust zealots in this thread.
Generally, they don't. Zealotry is not specific to Rust, but you've reminded me of some moments in the 2020's edition of Programming Language Holy Wars™.
Like, one zealot stabbing at another HN commenter saying "Biased people like yourself don't belong in tech", because the other person simply did not like the Rust community. Or another zealot trying to start a cancel campaign on HN against a vocal anti-Rust person. Yet another vigorously denied the existence of Rust supremacism, while simultaneously raging on Twitter about Microsoft not choosing Rust for the Typescript compiler.
IMO, the sad part is watching zealots forget. Reality becomes a story in their head; much kinder, much softer to who they are. In their heads, they are an unbiased and objective person, whereas a "zealot" is just a bad word for a bad, faraway person. Evidence can't change that view because the zealot refuses to look & see; they want to talk. Hence, they fail the mirror test of self-awareness.
Well, most of them fail. The ones who don't forget & don't deny their zealotry, I have more respect for.
I fully stand behind my "Biased people like yourself don't belong in tech" statement from back then. If you follow the thread you'll see that this person mostly just wanted to hate. I tried to reason with them and they refused to participate.
I, or anybody else, owe them no grace beyond a certain point.
Where do you draw the line when confronted with people who already dislike you because they put you in a camp you don't even belong to but you still tried to reason with them to make them see nuance?
Skewing reality to match your bias makes for boring discussions. But again, I stand behind what I said then. And I refuse to be called a zealot. I don't even use Rust as actively; I use the right tool for the job and Rust was that on multiple projects.
If you're not interested in the context then please don't make hasty conclusions and misrepresent history. If you want to continue that old discussion here, I'm open to it.
EDIT: I would also love it if people just gave up the "zealot" label altogether. It's one of the ways to brand people and make them easier to hate or insult. I don't remember ever calling any opponent from the 'other side' a C/C++ zealot, for what it's worth. And again, if people want to actually discuss, I am all for it. But this is not what I have witnessed, historically.
> wouldn’t be seeking to make a quick buck selling ads against deep fake videos
This isn't a money making venture for them, and you basically admitted as much. They poured no doubt massive amounts of money into developing this and have little hope of earning it back soon. This is an attempt to keep up with other ai companies also developing video models in order to not look behind to investors. Making it available to users is similarly about increasing active user counts in order to look more successful. If people incidentally get off to it that's not their concern
Vision is how humans see text. So text must have built in adaptations to protect from visual noise. For example, two words that look similar must never appear in similar contexts, or else they would be conflated. Hence we can safely reduce such words to the same token. Or something like that.
Lots of words have multiple meanings and can mean different things even if used in the same sentence/context just from the interpretation of the person reading it.
Heck, it'd argue that most (not all) dayjob conflicts are down to such differences in interpretation /miscommunications
The validity of a sample size has nothing to do with the size of the set it's drawn from. 136 is a reasonable sample size, 25 is considered the minimum for a yes/no question.
This is why so many studies are impossible to replicate.
The sample size has everything to do with the hypothesis here. There is no one size fits all meaningful sample size.
When you make a claim about "men" writ large you need enough data to establish significance and account for the multitude of other variables at play which are massive here.
The china point is interesting because it's false. Google doesn't censor their results in china. There was a five year period some 20 years ago where they did, but prior to that period, and after that period, they didn't. China still does business with google. This is because china understands that it is their own responsibility to censor their internet. If google is unwilling to do so, they are satisfied with blocking all google services in china.
At a certain point in internet censorship, you exit the arena of sensible, free countries, where everybody can agree to get along and enforce each other's blocks, and enter the realm of a censorious authoritarian country that must constantly patch holes in their filters to protect their citizens from badthink. The UK has entered the second realm, but hasn't realized it yet. They see someone refusing to enforce their block for them as the ultimate scorn. In fact, it is what the vast majority of websites already do to china, iran, or any other similar country. Following regulations implies a willingness to play ball. When you no longer want to play along, you ignore the regulation instead.
Taxes are actually not a bad problem for AI, because a lot of the final calculations can be easily verified/sanity checked. The AI won't be able to get away with any math errors, the issues you'll likely see are incorrect categorisation of income or suboptimal deductions. The substeps like categorisation shouldn't be too difficult to manually verify
The problem is if you need to verify everything you might as well do it yourself.
I'm not convinced an AI will ever know how to distinguish a personal and business expense from a CSV dump of your credit card too.
If you're going to go down the rabbit hole of creating a CSV, you can already parse and categorize it pretty easily without AI. I've built and have been using https://github.com/nickjj/plutus for a bit now and I've gotten quarterly taxes down to less than 10 minutes.
But it seems that no BusyBox bug-fixer has spotted an easy-to-fix error that is stopping the BusyBox Bugzilla from working, and causing the hyperlink in that e-mail to lead to an error message that dumps out a glob of SQL and stack trace in black on red. It has a table named groups, and Bugzilla is attempting to use the table without quoting the MySQL keyword.
This bug was fixed in Bugzilla over a year ago. BusyBox's instance of Bugzilla is still exhibiting it today. It makes Buzilla unusable. Thus I do wonder at all of the automated messages to that mailing list with hyperlinks to stuff that does not work. Perhaps no-one is reading the mailing list as well as no-one using the bug tracker.
Anyone can send mails to a mailing list. It doesn't mean anything.
busybox.net is down, along with their git and bugzilla, and the github mirror has last commit a year ago. The bugged tc.c was last updated 2 years ago.
It might have been down when you checked, but it's working (if slow) now, and the git shows a commit as of 2 days ago. At the time of my comment I checked the mailing list and saw messages marked "patch" or somesuch as of a few months ago.
