From what I remember reading on some tutorial about Random Tree classifiers banks on the USA have to justify the specific reasons why a credit was denied, so hence why blackbox models cannot be used for this.
First they renamed master to main, and I did not speak out—because I had already updated my repos.
Then they removed the term whitelist, and I did not speak out—because I used allowlist anyway.
Then they tried to rename GIMP, and I did not speak out—because I used Photoshop.
Then they came for the unicorns, and there was no magic left to deploy.
Was GIMP being renamed a project stance or just something someone tried to do? I can't find anything about it. But their website says they have no intent to change it.
It's amazing that the western world's largest social network for programmers has an insult built right into the name. We're inches away from the whole thing being called "tardhub".
Sometimes I think what's the worst it could happen if Google decided to delete my main personal account that I use for everything: banking, utilities...
I guess it would a hassle to go to the bank but loosing some images or old emails wouldn't be so catastrophic TBH. Maybe being somewhat nihilistic/minimalist I think that it all will still be lost when I die, so why trying to grasp those things? In some sense it's kind of liberating not depending too much on these kind of things.
Without bothering to check on Amazon, I successfully scraped meta stuff for years at rates exceeding 20gbit/s without any proxies but just rotating IPv6 addresses on the same couple of blocks for every request
There are usually silly bypasses like this that easily work even with bigco stuff
Why did Google decide to choose Mercurial? Based on what I read the main reason was that the mercurial dev team was willing to prioritize features needed for Google to add custom extensions to support its monorepo, and the git dev team wasn't going to reprioritize just for the sake of Google.
Yes, that's correct. Another reason was that Mercurial is easier to customize because it's written in Python so we could sometimes just replace whatever we needed without needing much changes from Mercurial itself.
Yet another reason is that the .git directory is considered a documented API and several other tools and libraries depend on it (e.g. JGit and libgit2). So any new features for Google would need to be made to those tools too if we wanted things built on them to work.
I can second that the aforementioned reasons are true. The funny difference is that Google employs the primary git maintainer. Git has a lot of customers though so it rightfully is very conservative with development.
One thing that I see skills having the advantage is when they include scripts for specific tasks that the LLM has a difficult time generating the right code.
Also the problem with the LLM being trained to use foo tool 1.0 and now foo tool is on version 2.0.
The nice thing is that scripts on a skill are not included in the context and also they are deterministic.
