I think when people say non-deterministic what they mean is closer to chaotic, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory as in very small changes in conditions can produce completely different output making predictions difficult
I guess it depends on the culture but I would think it's a good thing to show interest and passion for this stuff by talking about things you do in your free time like setting up Minecraft servers, whoever you're talking to will probably have similar things like that
Agreed. I have had my tenure as a World of Warcraft guild & raid leader from many years ago on my resume for many, many years. It has always been a conversation point but managing 100+ people, who you don't pay, to prepare & train for complex, time sensitive operations including 25-50 people all working together, and all the management that comes with that, from DKP to class leaders, and so on. "Just think what I can do with paid people!"
I've never hidden my interest & passions, and I think the world is a better place when people are proud of what they enjoy. We're people first, after all.
Being available to the public if they bought the game doesn't mean it's in the public domain and you're allowed to upload a copy of it (or a derivative work) onto GitHub, though
(I like these projects but I really don't think they could defend themselves legally if you company went after them)
My approach is generally just to put the destination into Google Maps and select public transport, it works on the same data source as this and has live tracking
I struggled to understand the article, it doesn't properly explain what the exploit is in a way I could immediately understand, after staring at it for a bit and reading comments here I think it's a hardware register that's exposed to user software that shouldn't be but I really didn't understand that at first glance ("Poke the DRAM controller" made me think a hardware exploit) and I'm still not sure if I'm right about that (if it is, just start by explaining that instead of all the unnecessary filler and diagrams and animations of the Mona Lisa being scrambled and talk of bath salts which I still don't understand the relevance of)
Ultimately, yes, this seems to be a memory controller register that should not be exposed to ring 0 or above.
Ring -1 needs DRAM, so it tells the memory controller to give it some blocks. The memory controller hands back a “physical” address, and promises not to let anything but ring -1 access that address.
The exploit takes advantage of that control register to remap the same DRAM blocks to a different physical address. Since the memory controller only promised to protect the physical address it handed back, that protection is bypassed when using the new address.
There are several theoretical ways to mitigate this exploit, but it remains to be seen if the system is sufficiently field-upgradeable to defend.
That's a fair point. For factual content, AI output should be verified rather than trusted blindly because hallucinations are real. I see AI more as something to challenge and verify my thinking than as something to make decisions for me.
People also say things that are untrue? So I guess it boils down to reputation and attribution. I kinda feel like there is a wierd knee jerk to pretend like “ before AI, if it was written, you could trust it” which absolutely was never true.
Generally, people have to make an active decision to spread false information, or be misinformed themselves in the first place, and that's not actually particularly common, whereas for LLMs it's just the default due to how they work and it's difficult to filter out due to how they present everything with such confidence and authority
Thing is that pre-AI even for that you need to spend time and effort.
Now those deterrent barriers are not anymore so that kind of content can be produced massively at industrial scale.
"Somewhat dishonest"? It's plagiarism. Just because you claim the output of a machine as your own instead of the writing of another human as your own doesn't somehow make it yours and not plagiarism.
Most people (even pros) even with expensive cameras and great viewfinders still take mostly garbage shots and only some are good by luck. Same will be true here
Often switching from using your eye to looking through the viewfinder and fiddle with composition is how you ruin a genuine shot and miss the moment.
Also I used a camera without a viewfinder for some years, I guarantee if it's a fixed lens you learn what you get quickly.
Could you not develop the same sense by just looking in front of you without the viewfinder? I don’t see how a frame that doesn’t actually have any relation to what the camera is capturing helps you at all
The frame is a compositional aid, and it does have quite a strict relation to what the camera is capturing.
The best version of your complaint is that the viewfinder does not have accurate frame lines that account for parallax at various distances, which is true, but there are still ways of using the viewfinder to assist in composition.
If you take two or three shots at two meters, and look at what the camera captured versus where your composition was in the frame, you can immediately intuit a baseline for where the frame lines 'should be' on the viewfinder at two meters. "Occupies the bottom right two thirds of the viewfinder" for example.
Without a reference frame, these intuitions (and your aiming of the camera!) are going to be far less accurate.
Seems a lot easier to learn "it's accurate when it's about 8 inches from my face; it's this much off when it is 12 inches away" than to project out a virtual FOV from the camera at an arbitrary position onto the world.
