2) Police officer hides, catches unsuspecting driver speeding, stops driver, issues summons.

This is the very best approach. It's got the perfect tension leading to the greatest safety.

When you're expecting such an ambush (getting caught a few times will teach you to do that), and you're really paying attention and playing "spot the ambush" then they won't catch you. But because you're being so damned focused and alert, you're also a safer driver.

OTOH if they nail you, that means you weren't paying attention. So you weren't merely speeding; you really literally were speeding unsafely, and the ticket is the proof. (If you were so safe, then how come you didn't see the guy with the radar gun in time?)

Every. Single. Time. I got ticketed, my mind was wandering and not fully focused on the road. I wasn't looking for a speed trap, so I didn't see it in time. Busted. And those times I was looking? I didn't fall for it. I slowed down and avoided a ticket.

The ideal system (in terms of safety) happens to also be downright sporting! The ol' classic speed trap was almost .. a game?

Those techniques won't work on overeating because you need to eat to live, you can't just stop cold turkey like with smoking.

Overweight people have it constantly hammered into them that they're endangering their lives, it's not a messaging issue.

And if it's so bad, why is having the meds such a problem? Their side effects are minimal and they work better than diet and exercise and lifestyle change. Most of the arguments seem to be based on some weird puritanism, where only the "worthy" should be able to weigh less.

The current administration is focused on making it look like they're doing something.

If they really wanted to regulate microplastics they'd regulate them, not put them on a list where they'll sit and do nothing.

"We spent a ridiculous amount of effort to stop smoking in this country but have done almost nothing in regards to obesity"

I disagree strongly. We have spent as a society uncounted billions on addressing obesity, including on government programs. The problem is it's just a harder problem than smoking.

At the end of the day, just about everybody knows obesity is bad and that you have to exercise and eat healthier. Lack of knowledge isn't the problem.

"You have to admit that the majority of people are not like diligent you but are more like those bakery patrons"

So then the drugs sound like the best option? The only other argument is basically that of a sociopath -- people should be punished because they don't have the willpower you think they do.

They don't "fly" or "sail", what spacecraft do is "fall" there. Except for the bit of time they use their engines.

If the game bugs up 10% of the time I am out. I'd rather play it on Windows.

Unless it's a Bethesda game, in which case only bugging up 10% of the time would be an improvement over the Windows version.

Don't be such a hater, at this rate we'll reach 95% market saturation for desktop gaming by the year 3,562

That's generally how it's being done. The robot reads the code and writes specs. Then another robot reads the specs and writes code. If courts still accept the traditional clean room defense (and why wouldn't they?) then they're probably going to say it isn't a derived work.

It looks like the big catch, the actual source of uncertainty, is that the instance of the robot that reads the specs and writes code, may have seen the original code as part of its training data. That'll be enough to keep it from being a true clean room. In those cases, you'll be totally right.

But for any particular given project, was it trained on the original code? That'll be a case-by-case thing, and I think in a very long-term way, the answer will increasingly be No, simply because codebots' need to keep training on newly-published code, will diminish.

As an analogy, imagine you're a human author, and for some weird reason, one thing you like to do is have people tell you high-level plot summaries (specs) and then you write a detailed story from that. Someone says "the moon is unusually bright one night and people fear something bad has happened" and you write a story much like Larry Niven's Inconstant Moon, from that prompt alone. And you do this with 100 more stories, and most of them honestly don't appear to be derived. You take specs like "bombardier has crazy war experiences" and your resulting story is nothing like Catch-22.

But then one day, you're up in the attic and you find an old box that's been sitting there for decades, and inside, you find an old, worn, dog-eared paperback of Larry Niven stories which happens to include Inconstant Moon. Oh shit, you must have read that 45 years ago and then somehow "forgot" that you had, so your story wasn't truly independent of Niven's work. Your story turned out to not be "clean" at all, whoops! It was a derived work after all, because you read it ("trained on it") when you were a kid.

But the other 100 stories? Nope, those really were clean. Your story-writing process was almost legally foolproof, except that you had to learn reading and writing at some point, so your childhood favorites needed to be off-limits.

The heat wave made March be like late spring. Things that normally bloom in May, bloomed in March. And yesterday I got my first MRGCD irrigation of the year, flooding my back yard and letting the shade trees greedily suck up the water. We're spending a lot more time outside on the patio, compared to previous years during this time-of-year.

If I were stupid, I would be out of my mind with pleasure. Things feel wonderful right now.

But that water I just got .. that is The snowpack, probably. Instead of getting it all throughout summer, this first irrigation is probably the last, or second-to-last.

This summer is going to SUCK.

So begin the Obfuscated Object Code Compiler wars, to keep robots from writing machine language decompilers. The next few years are gonna be a wild ride!

If a computer program ingests code (whether GPL or not) and then outputs some code, the big question is whether or not the resulting code is a derived work.

If it's not a derived work, then the license of the original code is irrelevant, and it doesn't matter if it's GPLed, fully proprietary, or somewhere in between. The license has no say in the matter, because nobody ever needs to agree to the license; whatever they're doing is legal under copyright law so they already had all the permission they needed, without ever needing the additional rights granted by a license.

If it is a derived work, then that's copyright infringement unless the person who does it has permission. And the only way to get permission (i.e. cause copyright infringement to have not happened) is to agree to the license. So yes, the output would have to be GPLed.

But I don't think we really know whether or not robots reading code and then writing code from what they "learned," are creating derived works. Ask again in a few years, after a few court cases. This is hard. Rational people can disagree and come up with pretty good arguments no matter what side they're on. We'll see what the courts decide.

I think the most interesting case for determining it, won't involve a GPLed input. It'll be if Anthropic sues this project, since they will have contributed arguments to both sides. They'll have to argue "it is a derived work" in court, but to all their customers, they have and will continue to preach "it's not a derived work."

(in the margins)
Turn to page 122
Turn to page 65
Turn to page 89
Turn to page 44
Turn to page 12
Turn to page 56
Turn to page 35
Turn to page 55
Turn to page 77
Turn to page 130
Turn to page 120
Turn to page 110
Thank you for letting me waste your time.

You say "two separate teams," but Claude pronounces it as "two separate processes with no IPC except the specs files."

Microsoft Office if Microsoft Office compatibility is what you are going for, which it seems these groups are.