EsssM7QVMehFPAs's comments

Effectively rendering B and C incompatible in sharing D objects and structures. Just because you technically can doesn't make it a good thing in software architecture.

There is a reason why most globally linked runtimes (e.g. C++ or Java) do not encourage such mechanisms.

The Oracle vs. Google case is based around the copying of header files, including comments, verbatim as is.

The Oracle Amazon API usage is an identical re-implementation of the interfaces, but as a web solution there is per se nothing to copy in verbatim form.

The IBM-PC copycats back in the 80s went as far as clean room re-implementing the system with engineers who never saw the documentation. Ripping the header files out of a proprietary license package is quite cheap from a legal standpoint in comparison, even if open source is provided.

> Lord and master, hear me crying! -

> Ah, he comes excited.

> Sir, my need is sore.

> Spirits that I've cited

> My commands ignore.

You could also simply use an FM tuner and tune it in between stations for atmospheric noise. Like random.org did for a long time. [0]

Cosmic quantum noise for all your random number needs (after some filtering). Disclaimer: if you are under NSA attack you might have issues with this $5 setup.

[0] https://www.hostingadvice.com/blog/random-dot-org-true-rando...

In quantum mechanics, yes it is. See Bell's theorem.

Care about their responsibilities

They get my vote just for Spinal Tape creds

> Going to 11: Amping Up the Programming-Language Run-Time Foundation

> Why would their targets use Facebook for communication when there's many other existing platforms that provide this service.

Because the kids pedophiles target are also there. Just like the easily manipulated teenagers are there for extremist instigation.

The letter does not concern the overall prevention of E2E encrypted communications (obviously unfeasible). It is about predatory and abusive crime settings that take place in online communities, of which Facebook is the largest one.

I am all in for the right to privacy and freedom of personal information protection. But if we go down that road we just as well should discuss the basic limits of freedom in any (offline) democratic society (ie law). I would not want to answer such a question, because it is much more complex than the usual "protect our freedom" privacy advocacy makes it look like when you consider law enforcement as a fundamental role of governments.

Industrial Light and Magic would like to disagree, where Star Wars spaceships are still built in miniature model glory.

CGI is still not the same. Yet.

Source?

I was rather commenting on the first part implying that training a neural network with the statistical distribution that comes out of a GAN or VAE does not add value beyond that generative model capabilities.

I do not agree on that because as I explained, with domain knowledge it is very much possible to shape the data generated for augmented learning - beyond the plain statistical variations of GAN and similar, which are obviously of very limited value in training.

Highly interesting thought! Based on Psychology's understanding of dreams I would guess that sleep is actually rather a replay of real experience to stabilize our neural network, but most probably augmented with synthetic variations of the experience data.

You are ignoring the fact that generative AI is not closed-loop algorithm. You can synthesize expected features in a data set and feed them to the detector - out of bounds of the generative neural network that rather serves the purpose of mapping into (a subset of) the proper input space.

The power of synthesis is not within the GAN or VAE, it is in the outside mechanism that guides the creation of content with specific domain knowledge about the feature space.

This might not replace the value of real data, but it will allow to accelerate bootstrap, improve coverage (at cost of accuracy), or provide free environments for auxiliary processes like CI/CD in many deep learning applications.

There is a lot of published material on synthetic data augmentation if you actually look for it.

Kotline looses me at val vs. var

So much focus on readability otherwise, what happened there?

Why would they release an audit that effectively provides them with zero-days into encrypted suspect disks.

They release now because no one is using TrueCrypt any longer..

Your argument being? That human-induced global warming affecting the life of millions, potentially billions of people, should be ignored because worse has happened in Earth's history? Because humans also adversely affect different parameters of the environment?

Also, it is easy to pinpoint this issue to a little girl from Sweden, but unfortunately she is just repeating the general scientific consensus. Harder to argue against that, is it?

They have simply checked in the libdarknet.so - quite overselling on the algorithm part in the blog.

It's object tracking and classification, so imagine a 2 ton robot arm swinging around a factory and failing to detect a person in the way.

"Personal data which have undergone pseudonymisation, which could be attributed to a natural person by the use of additional information should be considered to be information on an identifiable natural person."

GA pseudoanonymizes visitor data, but the does not exempt site operators from adhering to the consent mechanisms of the GDPR.

You most certainly do, even if it might not yet be prosecuted.

See article 6 1/a-f for lawfulness of processing.

Without consent there only remain select few conditions, none of which apply to the operation of GA for visitors without a legal contract with the site operator on a different level (ie. customer relationship).

It is only a matter of time..