And it should be "--" to begin with, i.e. "--hard".

I have done "Initial commit"s after having almost finished something. Sometimes fter >10k lines. Totally unrelated to LLMs, as I have done it years ago as well, and has nothing to do with LLMs. I see why you would think what you do though, but it does not logically follow.

You are not alone in going down a dark path thanks to the advice of family and friends.

FWIW I am using public LLMs with a friend's depressive thoughts and it is not doing what is claimed in the article, so I dunno.

Also I am in a relationship and my girlfriend and I agreed that we will not talk about our relationship much. We do not tell others if we fight, because they take sides and make things worse, typically. LLMs are definitely not alone in this, although in my experience LLMs did not really take sides.

If what you said is true, then it seems like humanity is working as intended if we take away the rails?

Yeah I mean its over exaggerated but I think the blast radius estimation was way too optimistic.

Good way of putting it, yeah. Do I think it's likely? No. Would I willingly allow for such a scenario to even be possible? Also no.

In an ideal world, you would have gotten those extra bucks. :P

Or even just 10% of them, or 50% of the first year savings

In the world of manufacturing this is known as a gain-sharing plan. Not sure I'd call it common, but it certainly isn't unheard of

"Removing an extra check", so there is a check, so the check is not removed?

It does not need to be an explicit check (i.e. a condition checking that your index is not out of bounds). You may structure your code in such a way that it becomes a mathematical impossibility to exceed the bounds. For a dumb trivial example, you have an array of 500 bytes and are accessing it with an 8-bit unsigned index - there's no explicit bounds check, but you can never exceed its bounds, because the index may only be 0-255.

Of course this is a very artificial and almost nonsensical example, but that is how you optimize bounds checks away - you just make it impossible for the bounds to be exceeded through means other than explicitly checking.

That may be true, but do you not want determinism where possible, especially within this context, i.e. filtering data?

Yeah, should probably implement rate-limiting. HNers were wildin'. :D

Working better now. But, what just happened with that inappropriate link from nully?

Is handle impersonation possible here, or was it worse than that? Or, just a joke?

Someone snatched the username when the actual nully left.

IRC without nickserv, good times

That's pretty darn funny. The impostor should have given some believable responses to keep it going.

It was hilarious.

That is what we have been doing for quite some time now, from what I gathered. Every time I see something becoming popular, I am like "Hmm, I've seen this before", and I really have. They just gave it a fancier name with a fancier logo and did some marketing and there you go, old is new.

If I think about it, I find it awful. The fact that we need to put junk in our own stuff just for crawlers does not sit well with me.