Small businesses I regular almost always give me a discount for using cash. Even when I make several hundred dollar purchases they extra appreciate it. They avoid the visa/stripe fees and I avoid my purchasing data being sold to advertisers. Everyone wins.
Brave and strong people with morals will quit working for the company. Customer service will worsen. People will start taking their money elsewhere.
Most people want to improve society; however, if every day it becomes clear to an employee that they are helping an evil megacorp some employees will try to do something about it. Example: Inform management how their policy is turning customers away. That it happens multiple times a day. That Sherry got a new job because she got tired following management's evil policies.
In closing they can do something about it. If enough of them push it up to their leadership, leadership will make changes. Come on bro you know this.
Been there done that. In some ways the best time of my life, and another ways the worst time of my life. However momentary homelessness does put things into perspective for a person.
What's important? Having that flashy new car or driving that junker that I must work on every two months.
Keeping up with the Joneses or living frugally? There's a big difference between needs and wants.
Making smart financial choices so that I can have a spine when speaking to my boss? Yes.
Post script: People can get a new job before quitting their current job...
Post script two: People can also bring issues up to leadership in a respectful way that doesn't risk unemployment. If someone's leadership is a tyrannical, it's probably best to get fired anyhow. Oppression is never a good feeling; be it from a boss or a government.
Am I misunderstanding something or is this not just replacing one password with two salts and another password? What benefits would this have over just generating a password?
You would, in theory, just need to remember your one strong password, like with a password manager (except 2fa and such). The benefit is that you don't need to store anything, just remember your master password and the "salts" are obvious to you, but an attacker with the clear text password would not be able to differentiate a random password to a pashword result. From the generation time and cpu usage on pashword I'd also guess bruteforce is very hard even if you would know it's generated.
Somewhat related, there is a Twitter thread about (not quite isometric) hex-grid pixel-art [1].
In a previous thread [2], Oskar Stålberg, creator of the games Bad North, Townscaper, is talking about his use of grids and their dual for procedural tile placement.
Franekk, an amazing pixel artist, is reacting to this that hex-grids are difficult for pixel-art, and later figures out that Oskars trick does indeed work for pixel-art too [3].
> It is learning from it just as a human reader would
I don't see how that invalidates the copyright/license argument. So, instead of just a straight up license violation it's a license violation via plagiarism.
That argument wouldn't hold up even if it was a human that caused the violation. You can't just paraphrase someones licensed work and then lie about looking at and pretend you made it yourself, which is basically what seems to happen with co-pilot, as it doesn't also automatically reproduce the license of the code it reproduces.
> You can't just paraphrase someones licensed work
Yes you can. That's exactly why you paraphrased it instead of copying verbatim.
At the fringes, your transformation may not be enough to overcome the requirements, but that's an exception. Nearly all paraphrasing is legal by default.
It learns the same way a human does by learning patterns. It is not illegal to comprehend how to accomplish tasks by reading other people's source code.
The arguments against my point always assume perfect memory of everything this model is consumed. This is the plagiarism position. In reality, some patterns are more common than others and generate a code that looks nearly identical. I can’t speak for the reasons for this, as I’m not familiar with all of the methods. However, I don’t assume that is the current working state or intent of Codex.
> It learns the same way a human does by learning patterns. It is not illegal to comprehend how to accomplish tasks by reading other people's source code.
It remains to be seen whether ML is true "learning" in the sense of developing a skill the way a human does over time.
It is however irrelevant to the manner in which this model operates today.
I could only read the second article for now (the first one is blocked at work), but while interesting it's not quite what my question was aiming at. That is, it solves the malloc/free hassle in an elegant way, but it doesn't solve the fundamental problem to know in advance how much memory you'll need.
That is, the second article basically says: (pre-arena) It would be so easy if we could just allocate everything on the stack, because lifetimes are nestable. But the article doesn't say how to know the required size of the stack in advance, to prevent stack overflows. That was the part I was interested in.
edit: I could read the first article through a proxy, but it also just talks about different allocators. I'd like to achieve what com2kid was talking about: "Allocating all required memory is, IMHO, a great practice for almost any type of program."
Late reply, but the most common ‘advice’ (usually in the form of post-mortums) I have seen is that knowing the total allocation size for a program is an engineering analysis based on memory availability for a given system and estimated worst-case bounds for memory usage. The system is then designed to work within the constraints generated by that analysis.
Pre-allocating certainly requires a system/application designer to consider the most likely worst case resource usage and then enforce that estimate throughout the design.
Further, for systems that have modern memory sized resources (i.e. 16gb and up) the system is designed to work as though memory was a stack and then that stack is allocated from system resources using something like a growable array, or slab style allocator. So that if the estimated wort case usage is reached, the ‘static memory allocation’ can be relocated and enlarged or added onto with a new slab.
Your comments imply the sticking point may be the estimate of program memory usage, and that is a very fact/situational analysis.
Except if they purchase a subscription to these benefits through one of the two companies (same parent company) that provide them. The subscriptions are of course competitively priced, since they only have the best interest of their customers at heart.
I find it's helpful to create a monopoly on purpose, and then give that monopoly for a service an additional monopoly on violence. Then, if someone doesn't want to use the monopoly, they can just send men with weapons of war to force them to fund the monopoly at gunpoint.
A foulmouthed, self-taught botanist walking through deserts: urban, sub-urban and actual; talking about the origins and habitats of plants he encounters, while slagging off shitty city planning, dying lawns and ocasionally, Wholefoods.
