nothacking @ nothacking @discuss.tchncs.de

Posts

6

Comments

442

Joined

2 yr. ago

Counterexample: the many cases of large companies (Best buy, Cisco, Skype etc) being sued over violations of the GNU GPL. The original authors of the code often get awarded millions in damages because a large company stole their work.

Part of the reason it's like this is because insurance companies try their very hardest to avoid paying, but that means you have to do the same if paying yourself.

This actually makes a lot of sense. A computer executing the code and a human maintaining it need to know different things. A human needs to knon what the code does on a high level (what the programmer intended), how it handles (or does not handle) edge cases, etc. A computer only needs to know how to run the code at a super low level. Without comments, it is impossible to know if code is doing the right thing, or what is expected from the caller.

I reserve comments for explaining why a section of code is needed or explaining how a complex algorithm works.

i = 0; // Set i to 0 is pointless.

if (last_output_vertex[i] == bounds[i]->length - 1) contibuting_bounds[i] = NULL; // stop outputting a bound if the entire bound has been output is helpful.

Copyrights don't just benefit the rich, in fact they severely limit what big companies can do with what you create. On the other hand, the current copyright term in most places (70 years after the author's death) is just ridiculous, and simply guarantees that you will not live to see most content you saw as a kid move into the public domain, while the current owners continue to make money that the original author will never see.

I would draw the line at hyping NFTs on social media, actively turning poor desperate people into even poorer suckers.

IANAL, but I think that they would only have to prove that people were lying with the intent to commit fraud, not that they were not stupid for falling for it.

I have found literal thousands of posts made to Reddit and Twitter claims that these are good investments and some outright lying about NFTs and shitcoin s, and I don't have millions of dollars at stake.

I think most people that lose money in NFT and shitcoin scams are not the ultra rich, but normal people looking to grow their savings to avoid having to work multiple jobs just to break even. I know people that have lost years of savings and some even got evicted because of this crap. Most ultra rich know these are scams, after all, they have to get rich somehow.

If you bought one the best thing to do (financially) is to immediately sell it off to another sucker, perpetuating the cycle of scams. (Make sure to hype it on Reddit or Twitter so you can sell it for even more)

These are literally the worst investment possible, because all the value comes from speculation (people buying them to get rich quick). As soon as those buyers get spooked the cones crashing down to zero. With something like a share in a company, that entitled the holder to partial ownership of the company. Even if the company goes bankrupt, you would still get a share in the former assets of the company. You can of course lose money if you buy at a price that is much higher then the actual value due to speculation, but this is limited by the intrinsic value of the company's assets.

You might enjoy this place: !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

A fuck_cars enjoyer I see.

Well that won't work for 7, 8 or 9.

Would CC BY-SA do? It requires attribution, and there is no real way to attribute text from an LLM to the training data. Assuming that LLM output counts as a derivative work of the training data, which a consensus on has not be reached. (It would also be required for any other copyright based solutions)

Edit: reading the licence, it requires "a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Derivative Work", which may allow companies to just post a huge page showing all the training input, but I doubt this counts as "reasonable means".

Just like any other drive, assume they could fail at any moment, and have backups.

Is this part of a Hi-Lo implementation for blackjack? (Also, ewww mixed types)

Redreader still works for some reason.

This just prints:

    
💩
🍊
🍉
🍉
🍍
🍎

  

Line 38 and 39 just check if a function that always returns false is false and if so, prints "💩\n". (C++ uses the bit shift operator for file IO for some reason)

Line 41 creates a vector of shared pointers to an abstract class, or in other words, an array of functions. Each function prints the emoji, mostly the same as the name, but not always. ( 🍒 is the exception, it prints "🍉\n")

43 and 44 just loop over the array and call every function inside, printing a bunch of emoji.

Line 46 returns the result of std::rand(), but because the programer forgot to call srand, the result is always the same (1804289383 for me).

(There are also a few missing includes, but I doubt this is intentional)

These aree same guys that asked people to pirate instead of buying from key resellers, because most of those keys were bought with stolen credit cards. In that case the game company doesn't get to keep the money, but does have to pay exorbitant fees.

I actually get 2x the battery life of windows on my ThinkPad. If you run a distro like Arch or Gentoo you will have to configure some things to get good battery life, but with Mint or something it just works™. If you want a whole lot of battery life you could get a laptop that has a replaceable battery, like the T480 (still plenty powerful for Linux), then your max life is limited only by how many extra batteries you are willing to carry.