Comment Re:486 seemed magically advanced in the mid 1990s. (Score 1) 105
Wasn't there an 80186? That literally nobody built anything with? Like, it was almost a proof of concept?
Wasn't there an 80186? That literally nobody built anything with? Like, it was almost a proof of concept?
Just today I noted that GIMP 3.2.2 (an application, not an OS) has dropped support for 32-bit x86.
It's not out of date, it's a simplification.
They don't innately understand their capabilities, but information about it's own capabilities may be fed explicitly into it by other means, just like any other data you want to endeavor to put into the context.
The concept of asking if it implements a certain behavior and either it's deliberately lying or it's not actually there relies upon a false assumption that of course it has innate knowledge of it's own implementation without any "help".
The core relevant issue is that the LLMs will generate an answer based on no data. Instead of "Information on that one way or the other is not available to the model" it sees the answer most consistent with the narrative to be "Those behaviors do not exist". LLMs tend to generate output that implies confidence regardless of whether there should be confidence or not. The workaround has been to try to do everything possible to make sure there is actual data in the context window and hope it just doesn't come up that much, but this is only so possible. Some coding has the opportunity to use test cases to add "the output given failed to work" automatically to the narrative to drive iteration and maybe get further.
What's more, you really have to know what you're doing to coax it into re-using code, rather than rewriting the same functionality with each prompt.
Isn't there an API for lazy loading? What's wrong with that? Developers not using it? They should be very careful of trying to outsmart dumb web "developers", the Web is messy enough as it is.
This will help push FOSS gaming and community driven self-hosting of gameservers back towards mainstream. And that's a good thing.
They did, but it's never too late to cheapen how they're current stuff is produced.
Still, I think they know all too well that mainframe is "stuck" doing it the way they always have done it.
I was into climbing and moutaineering in my teens. I clearly remember when climbing an 8k mountain actually meant something and doing it proved you were an experienced hardcore expedition climber. Everest today is such a joke and farce that I'd be embarrassed to brag of even attempt a summit. They should just install a Via Ferratta, stairs and bridges all the way to the summit and be done with it. That would actually make sense, given the state of things we've reached. They have actual traffic effing jams at the summit and the rainbow flank is littered with the dead bodies of dimwitts taken out by Darwin. It's called "rainbow flank" because of all the colored jackets of the dead.
Just build a staircase, ask an obscene fee to pay for it and void all insurance for anyone who goes above 5500 meters. Problem solved.
If you are diabetic, sure. Otherwise, you obviously haven't known anyone who has tried to get this as a weight control solution and deal with insurance that absolutely doesn't want to pay for that stuff.
Here's the thing, some folks do the discipline and keep a healthy weight, but they are basically always feeling hunger. Some people don't feel it but some people are having to constantly fight sensation of hunger, with a respite of a little bit after a meal, and almost never feeling 'full'.
If we had something to tame the rather depressive experience of constantly denying one's hunger because you know in your mind that you got the nutrition and caloric intake you need, but your body wants to eat your way to obesity.
Problem is that the only viable market for mainframe are current mainframe customers, who are so change averse that if you even hint at breaking compatibility they will be triggered to start evaluating *all* their options if they are faced with a potential migration anyway.
IBM may love the idea of shuttering their in-house stuff in favor of massively cheap commodity stuff, but they would absolutely no longer command mainframe margins.
I'm part of that 5%+. The thing about gaming on Linux is that I have no time or mood for fussing around with compatibility issues. Steams Proton layer handles quite a few games without trouble. I used to be a GoG only person but since their requirements for Linux versions are very specific and cause trouble on newer versions of Linux I finally installed Steam on Linux a few weeks back. Sure it's quite a performance hog and it keeps you in the dark about wether it's taking so long to launch because it's running some background update thingie and you have to use top to see what's going on, but other than that, the games listed as playable on protondb launch with a simple click. Which is good.
Guess I'm a steam customer now. After, what, 25 years? I remember when Half-Life 2 came out and they tied it to steam to push the first big digital game distribution platform. Guess that was/is a huge success. Provide good value, get my money. I don't mind.
For all I care they deserve it. If they can't or won't run the servers anymore they should at least release the server as freeware and allow for hobbyists to continue hosting the game. This used to be common practice with multiplayer games and we should enforce this practice by law, especially with people paid solid money for their game copies.
LibreOffice was considered somewhat outdated and the OnlyOffice codebase more modern with less cruft. While LibreOffice still is considered as a viable alterternative to commercial solutions, FOSS OnlyOffice / Euro-Office is now officially preferred.
JavaScript is actually a pretty interesting, powerful language, but one with quite a few problems. (I recommend the book JavaScript: The Good Parts by Douglas Crockford if you want to learn more about that.) TypeScript solves some, but by no means all, of those problems. From what I've heard, it's increasingly popular.
I have ways of making money that you know nothing of. -- John D. Rockefeller