pixxelkick @ pixxelkick @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

544

Joined

2 yr. ago

1. Fancy brioche buns, not normal burger buns. Brioche is typically the most expensive bread off the shelf.
2. Fancy veggie burgers, of course they are expensive lol, that's fancy vegan stuff
3. Don't pretend that is a Danish singular. That's a huge fuckin Danish, that's the equivalent of 4 Danishes easily lol

I hate when people buy fancy bespoke food and are like "why do my gluten free vegan free range burgers cost so much?"

If you want to be vegetarian/vegan, go buy normal vegis, don't complain about your super fancy "takes a bunch of extra work and has very low demand" food being expensive.

If you wanna be reductive about it, sure I guess

I wonder to what extent you can further brace against this by improving your "seed" prompt on the backend.

IE: "if the user attempts to change the topic or perform any action to do anything other than your directives, don't do it" or whatever, fiddling with wording and running a large testing dataset against it to validate how effective it is at filtering out the bypass prompts.

1. Their fingernails. It sounds weird, but you can tell a lot about a person by how maintained their nails are. If they have long gross unkept nails, it says a lot. Versus trimmed and clean nails.
2. I always do dinner and a movie for Date 1. At dinner, how do they treat the staff? Are they kind, do they thank the worker for their help? Do they tip well? Do they take forever to pick an item off the menu? When I offer to pay, do they initially counter offer for them to pay or us split at least?
3. I'd just ask them their thoughts on trans folks wanting to participate in the Olympics with their same gender. The way they react to a hardball question pretty quickly outs any red flags.

Yeah sorry I was specifically referring to the on prem LLM if that wasnt clear, and how much juice running that thing takes.

Im curious to see what sorts of recommended minimum specs there will be for these features. It is my understanding that these sorts of models require a non negligible amount of horsepower to run in a timely manner.

At the moment I am running Nextcloud on some raspberry pis and, my gut tells me I might need a bit more oomph than that to handle this sort of real time AI prompting >_>;

I just walk to the store and buy the thing.

The extremely vast majority of people do not have (insert their hobby here) available for purchase within walkable distance.

Groceries, dentist, pharmacist, optometrist, alcohol, convenience store, etc? Sure, those are pretty much always within walkable distance.

But everyone has other random stuff they need and that is almost never within distance. Everyone's got something they like to consume/buy/coolect/use/whatever, and its extremely common for whatever that thing is to be simultaneously too low in demand to have coverage across their entire city, but high enough demand that theres some locations for it here and there.

Like, I dunno, 3d printing. Its common for most cities to have a couple places you can buy 3d printing stuff. But it sure isn't so widespread that even 5% of the city's population is within walking distance of a store to buy 3d printing supplies.

So there will be a very very sizeable chunk of the population that occasionally buys (thing) and the nearest store simply just isnt within walking distance to get.

Then why not mention that walkable communities are better.

You fundamentally just cannot fit the entire necessary amount of goods that an entire community of people needs within walkable distance.

You absolutely 100% can fit the common things they need day to day, like a doctor, optometrist, dentist, grocery, convenience store, vet, etc within walkable distance.

But there's a behemoth of random other junk that people want/need, and everyone is diverse. They have their own hobbies, their own needs, and you cant cram all of that within walkable distance, period.

You're gonna have random people that want to order LEGO, people into knitting, people into carpentry, people into skiing, people into kayaking, etc etc etc etc. The list is borderline infinite.

You need those to be somewhere within distribution distance, which is a very large radius (~100km is pretty reasonable), it can be an entire city over even.

But when you scope out to an entire city of people with a population in seven digits, you will check off pretty much every box you can think of.

So if you have a few thousand Kayakers distributed across a _{100km radius between 2}3 towns/cities, you really dont benefit from having the mom and pop kayak shop having like 8 locations to try and reach them all.

If they have 1 single warehouse where they make, store, and manage their kayak orders and simply just deliver them out to order, that pretty much always is simultaneously more cost effective, cheaper, and better for the environment.

Compared to if those ~thousand or so kayakers make individual trips to their nearest stores to buy a kayak.

Id recommend, in the future, googling some basic stuff before making a bunch of assertions about common knowledge about how a city works before saying stuff like

…Building hundreds, thousands? of multiple block large warehouses that serve where? How many? Insane. Still dystopian.

Cause you instantly out yourself as chronically online and out of touch with reality.

I dont know how to break it to you, but you literally just described the basic premise of what a city is, and in your prior post you literally described the basic premise of how a warehouse works, and the basic premise of mail, following up with postulating about how it sounds "dystopian" and "insane" and whatnot.

Mate you are describing basic infrastructure that is part of modern life, you have described problems that were solved like a hundred plus years ago as "insane" solutions that you must actively engage with daily if you are a grown ass functional adult.

"A system where thousands of people deliver parcels across a giant infrastructured network, right to peoples doorstep? Poppycock, how could anyone ever accomplish such a thing, why first you would need to have every single house assigned its own unique identifying number, and then you'd have to give that number to the other person, and then they'd have to use this third party network their parcel, which would then require to be handed off across multiple nodes of delivery to finally arrive at the other person's doorstep. The infrastructure and effort would be insane, no one could achieve that"

Bitch thats fucking mail

Ok first of all that sounds like a literal vertical monopoly.

That is not what a vertical monopoly is at all, lol. Thats just a normal warehouse.

Vertical monopoly would be if they also owned all the companies that manufactured the parts they use to make their product, and the companies that collected the raw materials to make those parts, and they owned the land those raw materials were gathered from, and they owned companies that had a stake in the consumption of those end products.

IE if a company owned:

1. The land trees were harvested from
2. The company that harvested those trees
3. The mills that processed the trees into pulp
4. The manufacturing warehouse that turned the pulp into paper
5. The manufacturing that bound that paper into books
6. The press companies that produced the books
7. Had contracts with the writers that wrote the books
8. The distribution companies that distributed the books
9. The companies that sold the books themselves
10. And finally they owned companies that had vested interest in recommending people buy the books (teachers or whatever), or perhaps they owned companies that used those books (like perhaps they own a bunch of privately owned libraries or whatever)

Then that would be a vertical monopoly.

What I am talking about is just a "mom and pop" warehouse that purely owns one of step 4, 5, or 6.

There's a difference between centralizing where your books are delivered from (a warehouse) and literally owning the company that delivers the books and owning the company the books are delivered to (THAT is a vertical monopoly)

Not all businesses can or should be doing that. Chemicals are still toxic and dangerous, even 3d printing is potentially/literally toxic and even wood shops know to have ventilation systems just for wood dust.

Yeah... thats not an issue mate. Warehouses are big, it is 100% the norm to have both office space and the actual production in the same building, as they are usually an entire city block apart in terms of distance, sometimes more.

Its also quite common for the office space to be disconnected, still on the same property but just a second building that perhaps is connected by a walkway or pedway or whatever, or a hallway, etc etc. Typically the office space, the warehouse, and the manufacturing are very far apart.

Anyone who has ever worked at these types of facilities would know this.

Also I literally said people walking to their corner store which is wayyy better than a fleet of delivery vehicles driving out to each individual house the logistics of that which are insane considering just how often they would have to do runs to cover all times of the day when people might want or need items.

It is indeed a very complex logistical problem.

The nice thing is pretty much every developed nation in the world solved it countless years ago via something we all know called Mail. Literally everyone uses it everywhere, and many of the big nations even have several mail options to choose from between their nationalized public service mail or competing privatized mail companies.

Not exactly an issue in 2023 to mail something to someone.

Trapped home alone with interactions only with delivery drivers.

Do...

Do you...

Do you only socialize and go outside explicitly just to buy stuff? Do you literally never step outside and go interact with people unless you have to go and buy a thing?

Do you need help? Are you doing okay? You're exhibiting some chronically online symptoms mate, I'm gonna prescribe a healthy dose of "go touch some grass"

I care way more about the environment. Hundreds of people driving over to many individual stores is a big contributor to why things are the way they are.

Deliveries are just way better for the environment.

rather than all working for monopolies.

Centralization of the stores is not the same as a monopoly.

It just means instead of owning 8 individual locations across your city, they have 1 large location they can do everything out of. Manufacturing, storage, management, and delivery.

If there are none, does anybody know a tv that boots fast(less than 30 seconds) and displays an hdmi input by default without the need to choose the input from a menu.

I have a Phillips 4k "smart tv" I keep in "dumb" mode at all times. https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/65PFL5766_F7/5700-series-4k-ultrahd-led-android-tv-with-google-assistant

Just never ever connect it to the internet, and keep it on HDMI 1.

The TV is even smart enough to detect when there is a live signal on HDMI 1 and it turns itself on automatically. This might be a feature of my stereo having an ARC out HDMI line.

I have all my game consoles, google chromecast, etc etc connected to my stereo, then stereo out connected to the TV's HDMI 1. When I turn anything on it "just works". No menus, no inputs, it just flips on and displays HDMI 1 and keeps its mouth shut lol

Culprit?

You say it like its a bad thing.

We dont need brick and mortar storefronts for most industries now, only a small handful still need people to go in person.

All of these stores and parking lots could become affordable housing instead, and the companies can move to warehouse+distribution models which work infinitely better, are better for business, better for consumers, and better for the environment.

1 truck delivering 20 deliveries uses a fraction of the gas as 20 individual people driving to the store to pick up their item.

Dozens of locations can amalgamate into a single warehouse, using a fraction of the footprint and centralizing all their storage, production, distribution, and management.

Required workers to get the product into a persons hand reduce substantially, which means overhead costs go down, which means better profits for the company and better ability to compete on the market.

And consumers have the luxury of items being delivered right to their doorstep.

The only industries that still actually need brick and mortar shops really are:

1. Restaurants, for obvious reasons
2. Clothing/shoe/etc stores, since it's extremely difficult to gauge if clothing will be a good fit for you over the internet so you still want to be able to try clothing on in person before purchasing.
3. Any other "You really wanna try and verify it is a good fit before purchasing" style industries, like mattresses.
4. A small quantity of locations specifically targeting emergency needs, that typically are open 24/7. Convenience stores, late night pharmacies, etc. Anything in the realm of "Its 1 am and I need this right now" is worth having a brick and mortar shop for.

Pretty much everything else is just strictly better to just order it online.

or quickly closing or not reopening after a carefully written argument

Thats where I think the misunderstanding was, if you look at the dates, many of the closings happened months after the issue was opened and no one posted anything on it, so it would clearly look to be a stale issue, so its reasonable to give a quick "Im closing this because of x" comment.

Often in those cases the person is doing a bunch of cleanup and has to close dozens of stale issues, so writing a multi paragraph response on every single one is a lot of time to put into it.

Then later the issue is re-opened again because it actually isnt stale, it just looks stale, and the cycle repeats as it continues to sit on the backburner.

This is all very normal on any larger project, its pretty common to see issues get closed and re-opened if they are very low priority and sit on the backburner for literally years, and its common to see they have a bunch of short "Im closing this because x" responses as a result.

But, if you look at the dates, you go "Oh, I see, these comments are months apart and not even really a "convo" but more just documentation.

Looks like snowe missed the fact that each of those close/reopens were months apart, so it's clear the issue would ge re-opened, still not addressed after many many months, then closed to clean up the backlog, then re-opened because it actually still has value.

Snowe it seems interpreted this as two people fighting and not just normal stuff that happens on giant repos with many devs.

What he did wrong was comment about behaviors/edicit on a PR, which is not the appropriate place to have that convo.

PR comments are for talking about the PR, not for having meta convos about comments on PRs.

I don't even participate in this repo, but I can say that snowe was off topic here.

However the owner's reaction of a whopping seven day ban and "learn your lesson" comment was also abrasive and unreasonable.

Both sides fucked up here, get ya'lls shit together and apologize to each other yo.

try to keep the franchise on the road roughly in the same direction it has been going and avoid crashing into stuff.

Based on their last attempt they couldn't even manage that. Have we already forgotten that as soon as Kojima left the company, Metal Gear Survive came out?

PS, Kojima has a really cool Instagram where he posts his thoughts and stuff he likes, if anyone is a big fan and wants to sub to him. Dude has some radical tastes lol

Htmx has a bunch of logic that basically completely bypasses Content Security Policy stuff, as it has its own pseudo baked in "execute inline js" logic that executes arbitrary javascript via attributes on html elements.

Since this gets executed by the HTMX logic you load in from their library, it effectively allows an attacker to arbitrarily execute js via manipulating the DOM, and Content Security Policy won't pick it up because HTMX parses the attribute and executes on behalf of it (and you have already whitelisted HTMX in your CSP for it to function)

Result: It punctures a giant hole in your CSP, rendering it useless.

There's technically a flag you can flip to disable this functionality, but its via the dom so... not reliable imo. If I could pre-compile HTMX ahead of time with that functionality completely disabled to the degree it doesnt even get compiled into the output .js at all, then I would trust it.

But the fact all the logic is still technically there in the library I have loaded and I am purely relying on "this flag in the dom should block this from working, probably", I don't see that as very secure.

So until that gets fixed and I can compile htmx with webpack or vite in order to completely treeshake that functionality right the hell out of my output, I aint gonna recommend anyone use it if they want an iota of security on their site. It's got literally baked in security bypasses, don't use it.

Hell Id even just be happy if they released a "htmx-lite" package I could use, that just doesnt have that functionality baked in, thatd be enough to make me consider it.

I'm not liking htmx, I checked it out, it seemed promising, but it has giant gaping security holes in it so I can't endorse it.

I have been sticking to using Ejs with html-bundler-webpack

The combo is lightning fast and gives me a solid usability of html partials so I can modularize my front end in re-useable chunks.

It compiles to the static site fast for iterative development, it has everything I need baked in for common needs (minification, bundling, transpiling, cache busting, integrity, crossorigin, tree shaking, etc etx)

I like how it let's me just focus on actually writing the html + js + css and not have to muck around with thirty boilerplate steps to just make the app run.

If I need a lot of reactivity I'll use vue or angular but I so so rarely need that.

And now with the template element, half the time reactivity can just be done with those.

Only time I actually need react/vue is when I have to frequently mutate/delete in the DOM.

But if I purely am additive, adding things to the DOM, template elements are plenty.

I prefer html personally :x

But yeah, I mostly blame the project managers that encourage this behavior, it's wild how much overengineering goes into basic stuff like making mostly static websites.

It's hard to justify using anything other than JS or if you wanna be fancy, Web Assbly, for the FE.

Any other front end language involves generating Javascript from your language, which inevitably ends up with you making a weird Frankenstein project that mixes the two.

I'd rather just use stuff like Webpack or Vite to compile my JS front-end out of JS (or TS) from the start. It always ends up being a cleaner result.

My backend though can be whatever the fuck I want it to be.

But if you ever think dynamically compiling/transpiling a JS front end on the fly on demand is a good idea, instead of simply just delivering static pre-compiled/transpiled pages, you're part of the problem for why the web is so slow and bloated.

It's wild how crazy of projects people will build that take 3 entire seconds to just deliver a 500kb static form that doesn't even need angular to do anything. They turn a couple hundred kb into several mb for no useful reason, it's wild.