AI is cool. AI research is valuable. AI has the power to be a transformative technology.
Corporate AI hype for tech fueled neofeudalism is not cool. Commodification of AI is not valuable. LLMs will never substantively change the world.
Honestly this is pretty much it. Sometimes you have to be pretty aggressive to get companies to do the thing you need; they will take advantage of the social friction required to keep you in predatory arrangements. They literally design it to be frustrating so you’ll give up. Like you, I try to make it clear to the person I’m speaking with I have no problem with them just the business. But if the corporations require me to get mad to do the right thing I will get mad.
BuT wE hAvE jOuRnAlIsTiC iNtEgRiTy. AlSo FuCk DaVe SiRoTa
Turbine should connect to loudspeaker to make this a closer system lol
SpaceX actually did use some kind of TS/JS chrome browser thing for their docking controls lol…
Guess what? Flight Software usually uses ancient proprietary compilers for specialized hardware running an RTOS, rip 😢
I demand the government force this private company to provide me free speech.
That’s a great distinction, I’m gonna start stealing that.
Some people aren’t anti establishment, they are anti-not-my-establishment. You can’t call yourself anti establishment if you just don’t like the current one.
I can’t stand for this protest, it’s so gd cynical.
The only cause I can support is “everyone sucks including me”
Tldr: New desktop environment designed for PopOS (but usable elsewhere)
It’s not horrible and yes a little pedantic. Also OP just copied the title from the blog so no fault there. Maybe something like “Python 3.13 will ship with experimental JIT flag” would have been more precise but it’s no big deal. I was more dropping a comment to summarize for others who hadn’t read the article rather than to be overly critical of title
This is awesome. The title is misleading though, it’s being checked into the code base and can be enabled with a flag. No guarantees it’s included in the base interpreter anytime soon
Overshooting 1.5°C is fast becoming inevitable. Minimising the magnitude and duration of overshoot is essential. Multiple lines of evidence indicate that, due to insufficient mitigation of greenhouse gases (GHGs), no pathway remains that avoids exceeding 1.5°C global warming for at least some decades, except for truly radical transformations. Minimising the magnitude and duration of the overshoot period is critical for reducing loss and damage and the risk of irreversible changes.
A rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out is required to stay within the Paris Agreement target range. The fast-shrinking carbon budget means that governments and the private sector must stop enabling new fossil fuel projects, accelerate the early retirement of existing infrastructure, and rapidly increase the pace of renewable energy deployment. High-income countries must lead the transition and provide support for low-income countries. All countries should pursue an equitable and just transition, minimising socio-economic impacts on the most vulnerable segments of the population.
Robust policies are critical to attain the scale needed for effective carbon dioxide removal (CDR). While not a replacement for rapid and deep emissions reductions, CDR will be necessary to deal with hard-to-eliminate emissions and eventually to reduce the global temperature. Current CDR is predominantly forest-based, but rapid acceleration and deployment at scale of other CDR methods with permanent CO2 removal is required, supported by stronger governance and better monitoring.
Over-reliance on natural carbon sinks is a risky strategy: their future contribution is uncertain. Until now, land and ocean carbon sinks have grown in tandem with increasing CO2 emissions, but research is revealing uncertainty over how they will respond to additional climate change. Carbon sinks may well absorb less carbon in the future than has been presumed from existing assessments. Therefore, emission reduction efforts have immediate priority, with nature-based solutions serving to increase carbon sinks in a complementary role to offset hard-to-abate emissions.
Joint governance is necessary to address the interlinked climate and biodiversity emergencies. The international conventions on climate change and biodiversity (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity, respectively) must find better alignment. Ensuring that the allocation of climate finance has nature-positive safeguards, and strengthening concrete cross-convention collaboration, are examples of key actions in the right direction.
Compound events amplify climate risks and increase their uncertainty. “Compound events” refer to a combination of multiple drivers and/or hazards (simultaneously or sequentially), and their impacts can be greater than the sum of individual events. Identifying and preparing for specific compound events is crucial for robust risk management and providing support in emergency situations.
Mountain glacier loss is accelerating. Deglaciation in response to climate change is even quicker in high mountain areas, including the Hindu Kush Himalayas and polar regions. This threatens populations downstream with water shortages in the longer term (including approximately 2 billion for the Himalayas), and exposes mountain dwellers to increased hazards, such as flash flooding.
Human immobility in areas exposed to climate risks is increasing. People facing climate risks may be unable or unwilling to relocate, and existing institutional frameworks do not account for immobility and are insufficient to anticipate or support the needs of these populations.
New tools to operationalise justice enable more effective climate adaptation. Monitoring the distinct dimensions of justice and incorporating them as part of strategic climate adaptation planning and evaluation can build resilience to climate change and decrease the risk of maladaptation.
Reforming food systems can contribute to just climate action. Food systems have a key role to play in climate action, with viable mitigation options spanning from production to consumption. However, interventions should be designed with and for equity and justice as linked outcomes, and implementation of mitigation measures should be done inclusively with diverse stakeholders across multiple scales.
Whether or not a human would say yes or no to this is what the AI is trying to learn lol
I love unique dialog, makes games feel so immersive :)
Thanks for your insights. I meant underrated in terms of exposure. As you indeed pointed out, it’s highly praised by those who have played it. And it’s not a hidden gem by any means it just feels less zeitgeisty than BG is. I haven’t actually seen the numbers so that could just be anecdotal.
With your incidental review, I am excited to play it! Probably after Starfield though :)
I haven’t played it yet but would like to so no spoilers please, but from what little I’ve seen it just looks like reskinned and slightly upgraded D:OS2.
DOS2 is one of my favorite games of all time and i am somewhat suspicious that people think Baldur’s gate is some novel masterpiece when really it’s that Divinity is super under rated and relatively unknown by comparison. Can anyone who has played both games weigh in on this?
And if it is the case that gameplay is very similar, is it just the setting / writing that is much better in BG that makes it stand apart or was it just coincidence / hype that made this game succeed harder?
Um, not positive what OP meant but I interpreted them as saying you are in a bubble if you think its obvious, not a bubble if you think its true. Which to be honest, I also had the gut reaction of “well duh this is pretty obvious” but for some people it very much is not obvious.
Deleting 107k lines of code is so much more based than adding 107k lines