strncpy() was not intended for null-terminated strings at all. It should have been named copy_null_padded_buffer(). Then its operation would have made sense to almost anyone. People wouldn't have minded the longer name much either, because hardly anybody uses null-padded buffers in modern software.

Note that a null-padded buffer that is completely full doesn't have any nulls in it at all. That's why strncpy() doesn't necessarily add a null termination. It also fills the entire destination buffer with nulls after the end of a short copy, which can be very inefficient when used with null-terminated strings.

TL;DR: don't use strncpy(). It doesn't do what anybody thinks it does.

You also have to give them achievable parameters. "You are always responsible" is not realistic. In some cases someone else is, in fact, responsible. And that's the rub of regulation, not that I think this means we shouldn't regulate, but it's going to always be true that doing it well takes effort. You can only ever reasonably expect that people are moving forwards (at best) and doing what is reasonably and humanly possible, and hopefully advancing the state of the art. Determining whether or not they are doing that is inherently complex.

It has seemed to me, for a very long time, that modern AI systems would need to be integrated with standard RDBMS systems for reliable persistant storage of raw information, some sort of no-sql database (memcache or some variant) for persistant storage of associations, some sort of document database for blocks of textual information, a SPARQL system for searching semantically-marked information within the document database, and a more old-fashioned back-propogation NN to provide a store of understanding that the user can directly manipulate.

Probabalistic classifiers are all fine and good, but only for a subset of the tasks needed. The above structure is a very loose, wildly-speculative initial framework. It's almost certain that if you actually tried building an integrated multi-model system, that you'd end up making a lot of changes to this basic idea, but that you'd end up having to implement the same core concepts that are identified in it.

The British government, in a desperate bid to increase profitability, has trademarked Alan Turing himself.

How is ChatGPT supposed to know the difference? Both involve hands and mouths, so clearly it's the same context. :P

From their careful selection of text, they WANTED it to mean something else so badly that they couldn't handle putting in the full text. It's a common blight on today's Internet, where people want other people's writings to mean something other than what was meant by the writer, so carefully select the words they read.

That's the entire point. Trying to solve other people's problems NEVER WORKS. You CANNOT control others into responsible behaviour, but you CAN place them in a position where they will choose to be responsible of their own accord. It is the ONLY way that works. It is the only way that has ever worked. If you look at computer programming, you will see this repeated over and over - well-meaning "hard rules" are ignored, STANDARDS are kept.

You must give them parameters and force them to find their own solution within those.

That's how it used to work here in the USA. Then the subsidies were terminated in favor of forcing students to get loans. Then a US senator led a campaign to prevent those students from discharging that debt through bankruptcy. That senator's name was (and is) Joseph R. Biden.

The boomers got the handout. I don't want anything they didn't get.

I don't expect to get it. I do expect to immediately discount any bullshit from the hypocrites who got it and think I shouldn't get it.

You didn't get it, and you're insisting nobody deserves it because you didn't get it, which is sad. You're sad.

OK, how do we provide this feedback? The article is chock-full of links, but not one for that. It gives strong "get fucked" energy.

Since it's not worth putting out the effort to figure out where to submit some comments they definitely won't give a fuck about anyway: In no way is it a "first class" anything when it's only for GNOME and only in a snap. Let us know when it's ready for prime time so we can test it out and decide if we care. There's a 0% chance I'm going to use GNOME or snap.

Yes.

So you moved the goalposts and declared victory? Good work, clown.

HFDWHhwHAHQAHHAHAHAHAHHAHa HA HAHAHHAHAHAH ahHAHAHAHAH HA AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

The difference is that it's not mass transit. It arguably should have been regulated more though, because and only because it cost The People money to chase after the dead.

It was easy: Turn the hue knob to the left for purplish skin, to the right for green skin, and then carefully center it for purplish-green skin.

Your solutions don't solve anything. e.g. "The department can't evade the bits they're actually able to do" means only that the argument will be over what they are able to do.

It still can be, if you've got a couple hundred bucks.