Comment Re:AI and systemd? How could I be less interested? (Score 1) 43
Why do assholes like you stipulate an emotional stance?
Systemd is simply bad software, so it has no place on my systems.
Why do assholes like you stipulate an emotional stance?
Systemd is simply bad software, so it has no place on my systems.
Actually I learned how to solve the halting problem in practice (in Operating Systems 101, no less): Just pull the plug.
Yes, very much so. Unfortunately, a rather large part of the human race is very easy to manipulate and does not get this at all.
And, incidentally, the EU already has pretty reasonable regulation. Copy that.
Seriously.
The intent is what would make it a criminal act, obviously.
What? You statement makes no sense.
Yes, exactly.
Exactly. My CS Diplom is from Germany. We had better rates, but 70% failed on Calculus or Linear Algebra were common. I passed both first attempt and only with proofs. Got told later by the Calculus TA that he had never seen this. Now, almost 40 years later and with a CS PhD added, I can say that I used a small part of Linear Algebra but I basically never used any if the Calculus stuff beyond what I already knew from school. Complete waste of time.
That nicely sums it up.
Of course, the market is changing and amateur-hour is slowly coming to a close. The EU CRA and DMA are first steps in the right direction. The next one is to add liability, qualification requirements and quality standards.
You need to get your head out of your backside.
Good engineers use the right tool for the right job because they actually know them all. Procedural, OO, functional, logic, and some others and hybrid variants. All have areas where they shine and areas where they are not the best choice. Using the wrong tool for a job is simple one thing: Incompetent. And using OO everywhere is exactly that.
Their bragging stinks of intent behind this. And then it is not a bug, it is a criminal act.
Insecure crap software is everywhere. That has to stop. But the only way left is real liability (probably the personal type that "managers" cannot wiggle out from), qualification requirements and quality standards. You know, like any other engineering field had to eventually enforce because the damage done got too much.
That OpenAI lost control of their own software shows a lack of quality and competence.
Indeed. Might even be "criminally negligent". They clearly cannot be trusted with any data and their product cannot be trusted with any task. Same for Anthropic.
APL is a write-only language. I can write programs in APL, but I can't read any of them. -- Roy Keir