The full changelog for this release is here https://docs.python.org/release/3.11.7/whatsnew/changelog.html#python-3-11-7-final

Surprisingly not shown that obviously in the release announcements, but I guess that’s fair since most of the changes will have no effect on 99.9999% of people.

At least the last season of scrubs was a different enough setting/cast, so even though it was definitely not as good, it didn’t “ruin” it for me like some other series that have gone on too long.

Well I kept using it until Infinity died, which was only at the start of this month!

If I do decide to go back, it will be by compiling the infinity APK with my own API key, but I’m not feeling much of an urge to bother at the moment.

It probably really depends on the project, though I’d probably try and start with the tests that are easiest/nicest to write and those which will be most useful. Look for complex logic that is also quite self-contained.

That will probably help to convince others of the value of tests if they aren’t onboard already.

Yeah they’ve put them in a couple places, It’s pretty bad. Had to work out how to create a custom uBlock Origin rule to block them.

I think calling it just like a database of likely responses is too much of a simplification and downplays what it is capable of.

I also don’t really see why the way it works is relevant to it being “smart” or not. It depends how you define “smart”, but I don’t see any proof of the assumptions people seem to make about the limitations of what an LLM could be capable of (with a larger model, better dataset, better training, etc).

I’m definitely not saying I can tell what LLMs could be capable of, but I think saying “people think ChatGPT is smart but it actually isn’t because <simplification of what an LLM is>” is missing a vital step to make it a valid logical argument.

The argument is relying on incorrect intuition people have. Before seeing ChatGPT I reckon if you’d told people how an LLM worked they wouldn’t have expected it to be able to do things it can do (for example if you ask it to write a rhyming poem about a niche subject it wouldn’t have a comparable poem about in its dataset).

A better argument would be to pick something that LLMs can’t currently do that it should be able to do if it’s “smart”, and explain the inherent limitation of an LLM which prevents it from doing that. This isn’t something I’ve really seen, I guess because it’s not easy to do. The closest I’ve seen is an explanation of why LLMs are bad at e.g. maths (like adding large numbers), but I’ve still not seen anything to convince me that this is an inherent limitation of LLMs.

Thanks for the info on crossposting! I thought I’d seen someone mention a cross posting feature but couldn’t see any button to do it. I’m using the Jerboa app on Android which I guess doesn’t have that button, but I see it on the website now as you say.

It’s also good to know that linking to the original URL is generally better and the rest can be handled by the UI - that does seem nicer.

Great TIL, I hate it.

Excellent how the page alludes to other horrible things to imagine, like “don’t pour hot oil into your ear”, and “don’t pour it in if there’s a hole in your eardrum”

I’d be happy if we’d just accepted “referer” as the correct spelling for everything, but instead we have the “Referrer-Policy” header, so now I need to check the correct spelling for anything involving referring…

I do sort of like the idea that because we want to keep backwards compatibility on software we just change the language instead since that’s easier.

Last time I checked companies don’t share backdoors they’ve added in release notes.

What sort of features 🤔

What better headline would you propose in this case?

I don’t think that rule is valid here, the question isn’t there because the answer is definitively “no” and they just want clickbait, it’s there because the actual article is about the question.

(Side note: I’m aware most people here will strongly argue that the answer is no, and I agree, but that is not my point.)

Of the 1,723 adults surveyed across the UK, 73% said technology companies should, by law, have to scan private messaging for child sexual abuse and disrupt it in end-to-end encrypted environments.

Found this interesting. I found the survey results here: https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/68pn2b6b57/NSPCC_OnlineSafetyBill_230427_W.pdf

The exact question I believe is being referred to was:

And do you think technology companies should or should not be required by law to use accredited technology to identify child sexual abuse in end-to-end encrypted messaging apps?

This seems like a really bad question, since it implies a coexistence of end to end encryption and big tech companies being able to read people’s messages, which doesn’t really make sense (or at least requires more clarification on what that would mean). The question as it is is basically “do you think child sexual abuse is bad”.

I use VSCode with config options to disable telemetry. Probably not perfect but good enough for me, I’m very happy using VSCode

I wish I could have extensions default to off and be able to turn them on selectively on sites. For things like darkreader I don’t want to use it 90% of the time so it shouldn’t need to have at access to site data.

By the way, I don’t like the title of this article, how is it done “remotely”, it’s just a list in about:config, no? Sounds clickbaity.

Is “scrapping” autocorrect, a typo, or intended? Not meaning to be rude just interested because I’ve only heard of “web scraping” but often see people write “scrapping”.

Now you switched when you shouldn’t have idiiot

Oops yeah I did

🎵 You start a conversation, you can’t even finish it 🎵

(because you reached your daily tweet view limit)

Google yeah, but I don’t think YouTube is too much of a stretch, especially now they have posts and polls and other stuff.