Saik0Shinigami

joined 1 year ago
[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 2 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

It’s common knowledge you can easily ask 300% of your default price if it’s the government.

primarily because government requirements are often way more strict than standard commercial or consumer... If someone sets up a contract with you that requires you do 100 things you normally don't do... you're going to charge more. 3x is likely fair in most cases where compliance becomes a thing just for the cost of talking to counsel about meeting those requirements.

If your vehicle isn’t disabled, what’s the big deal about stopping?

If you're just careening down the highway at 80, you're not really giving your car a fair chance to let you know that it's really in a disabled state now are you?

It's just common sense that after a major impact you should evaluate the safety of continuing in your current state. Stopping and doing the bare minimum of just looking at your car would be the first step of that process.

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Real Autopilot also needs constant attention

Newer "real" autopilot systems absolutely do not need constant attention. Many of them can do full landing sequences now. The definition would match what people commonly use it for, not what it was "originally". Most people believe autopilot to be that it pilots itself automatically. There is 0 intuition about what a pilot actually does in the cockpit for most normal people. And technology bares out that thought process as autopilot in it's modern form can actually do 99% of flying, where take-off and landing isn't exempted anymore.

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 16 points 3 weeks ago

Color doesn't matter to Lidar... Oh wait... Elon nixed that.

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

We have evidence of the US messing with nist standards

What... You realize that NIST is literally a government agency? It's part of the United States Department of Commerce. It's literally the US government. Are you saying that the government is messing with itself? What does that even mean?

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don’t like what this bit of information is doing to discussions in Lemmy.

Cool. That's fine that you don't like it. However people have a right to not see what they don't want to see. If they decide that means it's lemmy.ml, then that's their right.

Just like I have a right to not peer with lemmy.ml if I didn't want to.

Hell I have a hard block on ALL Russian and Chinese IP addresses. Not because I have something against the people. But I just don't want to deal with the headache of accepting traffic from those countries.

Just because some (or even a majority) of the people on lemmy.ml are fine to interact with doesn't mean that there isn't contention from other users and admins on that instance.

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

non-standard functionality of the latter.

My guy. In the 90's ALL browsers were non-standard. Even at the protocol level.
http/0.9 - 1991
http/1.0 - 1996
http/1.1 - 1997

html/1.0 - 1991
html/2.0 - 1995 revised in 1996, and 97.
html/3.0 - 1997
html/4.0 - 1997 revised in 1998, 99, and 2000.

Then comes all the add-ons like flash, shockwave, etc... Nothing was standard at this time-frame. We threw everything possible into browsers. Toolbars for literally everything (I remember even having winamp controls in my browser).

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Evolution_of_HTTP

Between 1991-1995, these were introduced with a try-and-see approach. A server and a browser would add a feature and see if it got traction.

Literally sites and browsers would just implement stuff just to implement and see if it became used.

A lot of recent times (2010's mostly) has been back peddling the mad rush of just shoving EVERYTHING into browsers. Now I actually fear we're going to far though... With google removing useful backend stuff for plugins and such. I just hope Firefox never follows suit.

Trillium

Trillian, not trillium. And they're actually still around.

I didn’t want you to think I downvoted you.

I'm admin on my small instance. I can see the votes. No worries. In this case the downvote is from xektop@lemmy.world.

Anyway, the most I ever use LLMs professionally for is to help rearrange content for better flow or maybe convert more rambly bits into something that's concise. I tend to be more verbose than I need to be (mostly because my documentation for stuff is wildly verbose since I tend to forget stuff, which is great for documentation... not always great for talking through something for a client).

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Why we gotta do Derpy like that?

I think their skillset might be limited to what chatgpt can produce.

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 6 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

People who proofread only generally make recommendations to edit. LLMs often "rewrite" the vast majority of the document.

If I tell a person who's my editor the concept of my paper and about 20-30% of the actual content that's in the end paper... sounds like someone else wrote the paper to me.

It's all up to how you're using the tool. Lots of kids out there will simple tell chatgpt to write something for them. Other's will simply ask for basic proofreading. It's a bitch to tell the difference on the grading side.

view more: ‹ prev next ›