It’s a bit of a stretch calling it a plastic, as it’s not petroleum based from what I’ve read.

It might, possibly, be a viable use case if the LLM produced the summary for an editor, who then confirmed it’s veracity and appropriateness to the article and posted it themselves.

There are certainly better ways, but I suspect this way is cheaper as the only need to stock one connector type.

Could you let me know what sort of models you’re using? Everything I’ve tried has basically been so bad it was quicker and more reliable to to the job myself. Most of the models can barely write boilerplate code accurately and securely, let alone anything even moderately complex.

I’ve tried to get them to analyse code too, and that’s hit and miss at best, even with small programs. I’d have no faith at all that they could handle anything larger; the answers they give would be confident and wrong, which is easy to spot with something small, but much harder to catch with a large, multi process system spread over a network. It’s hard enough for humans, who have actual context, understanding and domain knowledge, to do it well, and I’ve, personally, not seen any evidence that an LLM (which is what I’m assuming you’re referring to) could do anywhere near as well. I don’t doubt that they flag some issues, but without a comprehensive, human, review of the system architecture, implementation and code, you can’t be sure what they’ve missed, and if you’re going to do that anyway, you’ve done the job yourself!

Having said that, I’ve no doubt that things will improve, programming languages have well defined syntaxes and so they should be some of the easiest types of text for an LLM to parse and build a context from. If that can be combined with enough domain knowledge, a description of the deployment environment and a model that’s actually trained for and tuned for code analysis and security auditing, it might be possible to get similar results to humans.

I’m unlikely to do a full code audit, unless something about it doesn’t pass the ‘sniff test’. I will often go over the main code flows, the issue tracker, mailing lists and comments, positive or negative, from users on other forums.

I mean, if you’re not doing that, what are you doing, just installing it and using it??!? Where’s the fun in that? (I mean this at least semi seriously, you learn a lot about the software you’re running if you put in some effort to learn about it)

‘AI’ as we currently know it, is terrible at this sort of task. It’s not capable of understanding the flow of the code in any meaningful way, and tends to raise entirely spurious issues (see the problems the curl author has with being overwhealmed for example). It also wont spot actually malicious code that’s been included with any sort of care, nor would it find intentional behaviour that would be harmful or counterproductive in the particular scenario you want to use the program.

Edit the config was useful if you were trying to hook up a more unusual monitor that had odd timings or more overscan than a normal one, but it was definitely arcane magic.

No, I don’t have anything of that sort. Feel free to ask here if you’d like, but I’m just using the information I can find on the web.

I’m only going to do this very roughly, only for the transport and using US prices (as they’re easier to find), because the total cost of mining, transporting and dumping that much material is astronomical compared to the $70m budget. Even the transport cost alone are an order of magnitude higher.

Soil has a density of between 1,200 and 1,700 kilograms or 2,645 and 3,747 pounds per cubic metre.

I couldn’t easily find bulk rates for trunking soil, but bulk trucking rates for grain seem to be in the right area from what I can see. A truckload of up to 80,000lb costs somewhat over $6 per mile.

Given the weight limit per truck, and taking a middling estimate of soil density of 3000lb/m^3 (rock would be heavier and so increase the cost), we can transport around 80000/3000=26m^3 per truck, at a cost of at least 615=$90, or $3.46 per m^3. Our budget for the whole operation was 75,000,000/(3,500,000100)=$0.20 per m^3.

From those figures we can see that simply trucking the spoil fron the operation would be more than 15 times the cost of paying the landowners. That ignores all of the other costs. Local rates may be sonewhat cheaper, but probably not enough to make a serious difference, and you’d need to ship over 10 million truckloads of dirt, which would put massive strain on local infrastructure too.

If I read your measurements correctly, you’re talking about digging up over 350 million cubic metres of soil and rock, transporting them 15km and dumping them safely. Comparing that to the cost of paying the land owners gives you a budget of approximately $0.20 per cubic metre. Ignoring the digging costs, you’d have to check what your local rates for trucking bulk soil would be over that distance, but I suspect they’re more than that on their own.

Then you have the rather signicicant issue of what to do with the literal mountain of soil and rock you need to dispose of. Just dumping it is going to cause pretty serious changes to the local environment, not least of which would be a new mountain.

Add on the climb of bitcoin and thats pretty much it.

They seem to have completely lost sight of the fact that a phone is a tool. I don’t want ‘springy’ animations when I tap a button, I want my tool to do what I intend. I don’t want notifications that ‘subtly’ stretch when I dismiss a different notification, I want the dismissed notification to go away and the others to close up around it.

What I do want is a phone that works securely, quickly, efficiently, doesn’t waste battery on nonsense, and doesn’t distract me from what I’m doing. I guess we get ‘pretty’ geegaws instead.

Not a particularly good one…

Aha! That makes sense. Thanks again for a handy tool.

Thanks for making it, it’s a really handy tool for understanding who’s responding to posts.

One post I can’t get the votes for is: https://lemm.ee/post/24727759 I’m guessing that’s because the community is on a different server, but I can’t see an obvious way to get a link to the comment on it’s home server when I’m browsing mine. It would be great if there’s a way to resolve the correct server via the API, or at least report why it couldn’t get the votes.

The username associated with every vote, up or down, is available through the ActivityPub API. If your instance doesn’t show them (and I believe lemmy instances don’t by default) some helpful soul has built a tool to view them. Sometimes it fails for reasons unknown, but it lets you see who’s up or down voted a particular post or comment. I believe nom-lemmy interfaces like kbin also show you that information.

Fair point, I wasn’t sure it was the equals, hence my initial question. Drawing boxes with the box drawing characters does make a lot more sense.

The #define = line would mean the = would be effectively removed, rendering the for a syntax error. That is, assuming it is an equals sign they’ve redefined, and not similar looking character.

Have they #defined out the equals symbol? I don’t think that for loop is going to compile.

I couldn’t agree more. Occasionally I’ll use an appimage where something is not packaged for my distro version and I only need it temporarily.

Maybe I’m just long in the tooth, but linux used to be a simple, quite elegant system, with different distros providing different focuses, whether they were trying to be windows clones, something that a business could bank on being there in ten years, or something for those who like to tinker. The common theme throughout was ‘the unix way’, each individual tool was simple, did one job, and did it well. Now we seem to be moving to a much more homogenous ecosystem of distros with tooling that tries to be everything all at once, and often, not very well.