Calculus (e.g. differentiation), for example, is mind-blowing when taking it seriously, and not only useful.

The idea of "speed at an infinitely short moment", for example, is philosophy!

Not sure if it makes me autistic though, I mean, companies use wrong spellings all the time to differentiate, so often that I don't give much thought to it any more.

Anyway:

  cursor: hand !indispensable;

  cursor: pointer !important;

Dangerous but appealing idea.

Seems like every web dev (well, those working on server-rendered markup and without AI, at least) would feel a desire for this at some point, but it was doomed at the time.

In some ways, reminds me of Houdini regarding the CSS->JS coupling (the other direction is already normal, sure).

But the intent behind it was probably just to allow maximum flexibility... well

  div.title { background-color: expression( (new Date()).getHours()%2 ? "#B8D4FF" : "#F08A00" ); }

I'd love to hear more from people who actually used this.

What I wanted to say though is that I in fact do not find any of Bob Dylans music beautiful, not what you wrote.

To me, what I said about Dylan applies to cars as well, regardless of them being by Tesla or not.

But it's absolutely pointless to discuss public figures in a such an emotional way on HN, so my bad. Regardless of whether you find rocket launches or cars or Bob Dylan songs beautiful.

And Musk,.. whatever I'd have to say about him (not much tbh), doesn't fall under the discussion topics that made me join HN. I do read political and social discussions here. But stating or reading opinions about Elon Musk is not really a thing that makes HN interesting for me, so I'll refrain from engaging in threads like this in the future.

I mean, it's OK, artists need to have some of that trait.

Just coincides that neither of the two have created anything beautiful, at least in my mind. Unless of course, you consider money and fame beautiful in themselves.

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/444287

Most apps won't need these capabilities to function, but they are there, for all purposes good and bad:

- background activities with fewer restrictions

- less restricted file system and sensor access etc

- ...

sure, many app use this for nefarious things.

But real use cases don't need to be sophisticated rendering algorithms or what not.

I think good streaming apps also use these capabilities, for example, for performance.

I think it's true, but not sure if I'm just falling victim to false memories... help?

https://jakeludington.com/2003/12/17/create_your_own_windows...

Years of people deploying web apps and using (My-)SQL without prepared statements provide a counterexample to this. One can argue about ORMs, but stating SQL would need no abstraction layer around it seems questionable to me :/

Is there a real generalized and capable, but frustratingly "evil" coding model? It could fix so many more buttons in no time, and ideally open follow-up issues about the open questions.

I'm shocked.

AI or not, I stopped after this series of paragraphs failed to get to the point, indulging in flowery rehash of thoughts already discussed ad nauseam.

> Now, every act of giving is treated with suspicion. The gift of openness is no longer trustworthy on its own. The receivers of free software want to know how the gift came to be. Is it pure, or was it made with dirty machinery?

> In the case of the latter, some especially angry, would-be recipients won't just ignore the giver and forego the gift, they'll attack the giver with the fervor of someone who has themselves been attacked, apparently by the voluntary offer on hand.

> The anger is justified, but the target is tragically misguided

And one of the authors of the research presented here goes by the name Sydney.

Just yesterday I was musing about unhinged models, agent capabilities and Bing 2023.

Funny coincidences :) AI usage is still evolving like crazy.

Alas; very nice page (collusion.wiki), and interesting research.

Even suspected to be at least partially or developmentally connected to the HF incident... makes me awe, really.

And there's tons of Claude-generated code there.

Also, I'd guess this is not just to prevent any AI-generated code in the training data, but specifically their own.

Percentage of users who put out their code on the web and also have a plan where Anthropic promises not to train on their data is problem also low.

So not excluding own code could be a real issue, since it would be impossible to deduplicate the training and RILHF data from their sessions with the code accessible elsewhere, and written by the very same users.

I'm not any authority here, but I'd say, there's no need for a Reddit-moment to ban it entirely.

Though it wouldn't bother me either.

Directly linked single text posts are still publicly accessible last I checked, but it's a microblogging platform littered with spam.

HN submissions are usually long-form content, so it's rare to see X links anyway.

And comments obey the voting system, so who cares whether people link to X, LinkedIn, Facebook or whatever else.

Banning X in comments would require to ban the others as well, and I think the mods and users can handle by themselves what is relevant in that case.

And in case an X submission is genuinely interesting, it won't be hard to access or infer the content from the comments or other sources.