https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cewd82p09l0o
I think that's the link to the video?
Seems like it's part of a longer video...
Edit:
Hhmmm here is a slightly longer video that doesn't really add anything
Actual edit:
I genuinely couldn't find a better source video
“The United States has unilaterally and repeatedly provoked new economic and trade frictions, exacerbating uncertainty and instability in bilateral economic and trade relations,” the statement said. “Instead of reflecting on its own actions, the United States has groundlessly accused China of violating the consensus, a claim that grossly distorts the facts.”
That is such a wonderfully diplomatic way of saying "stop being a fucking idiot, your words have meaning and these are the consequences. Grow up".
Even just "grow up", tbh.
As much as I dislike the amount of reliance the world has on China (for the labour conditions there, the nature of their government to impose dodgy practices, generally speaking not being a "good egg"), China seems like the only trading bloc (although not a bloc, I guess... Maybe "trading entity") that can unilaterally stand toe-to-toe with TACO and win. So, good on china.
let data = null
do {
const response = await openai.prompt(prompt)
if (response.error !== null) continue;
try {
data = JSON.parse(response.text)
} catch {
data = null // just in case
}
} while (data === null)
return data
Meh, not my money
Edit: wrong comment
Yup.
It's a traumatic job/task that gets farmed to the cheapest supplier which is extremely unlikely to have suitable safe guards and care for their employees.
If I were implementing this, I would use a safer/stricter model with a human backed appeal system.
I would then use some metrics to generate an account reputation (verified ID, interaction with friends network, previous posts/moderation/appeals), and use that to either: auto-approve AI actions with no appeals (low rep); auto-approve AI actions with human appeal (moderate rep); AI actions must be approved by humans (high rep).
This way, high reputation accounts can still discuss & raise awareness of potentially moderatable topics as quickly as they happen (think breaking news kinda thing). Moderate reputation accounts can argue their case (in case of false positives). Low reputation accounts don't traumatize the moderators.
That's what I said?
Merge early at speed, merge late during congestion
Merging early when at speed makes sense, because you still have a lot of lane left before you have to merge - less pressure, more time, less likely to make a bad decision.
Merging late during slow traffic makes sense, as it allows you to align with gaps in the traffic and for the traffic to make space for you without having to actually stop.
I mean, they arent gonna hold a fucking press conference and announced that they staged a drone attack
That's the fun part about windows: who the fuck knows?
Can't look at the source, can't confirm if it's bad API implementation or bad documentation.
Trying to disable the windows key hotkey that opens the start menu, so the game The Witness can pause stuff, minimize, open the start menu and release the block on the windows key (IE do a more controlled start menu hotkey, instead of having windows rudely interrupt everything and break the game).
Started with a 5 second hang whenever a debug breakpoint was reached. The dev started digging into the issue.
Games use RawInput to get better mouse interactions, but that breaks the Microsoft recommended way of disabling windows key (as all input goes through RawInput instead of whatever the other windows API is).
In the documentation for RawInput, it specifically states the flag to disable the windows key doesn't work. So the Dev that was debugging the issue didn't try it. Until the next day when they had the realisation that MSDN windows API docs are garbage, tried the supposedly not-working flag and it actually did work.
The linked article is quite a good read, actually.
I had to use one of the mirrors in the SO answer
Edit:
The mirror I used https://caseymuratori.com/blog_0006
I'd say "be careful, you might end up on a list". But it would be your own list. Probably not an issue
Autopilot crashes?
You mean MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System)?
It's not autopilot. It's worse than that.
Due to the larger engines needing to be mounted in a different place, the flight characteristics changed between previous gen 737s and the new 737 MAX.
The characteristic change would mean it needs different certification from air authorities and existing 737 pilots would require recertification to be able to fly the new 737 MAX (which is supposed to be just an updated model).
All very expensive for what should be merely an upgraded model.
To avoid this, Boeing used software to change the characteristics in order to bring it inline with previous 737s and the existing certifications.
And as it was just an augmentation system, it was deemed high risk but not critical risk. As such, it didn't require full redundancy, didn't require Quick Reference Handbook entries incase of issues/errors, and didn't require training.
In fact, pilots had no idea it existed, what it could do or how it worked.
Which means when it had an issue and caused extreme pitch down due to faulty sensor readings, the pilots had literally no idea what was happening as they were trying to stop the plane from accumulating pitch down every 5 seconds.
And then Boeing tried to fuck with the narrative. I think they also didn't tell pilots about MCAS until after the Ethiopian Airlines crash (the 2nd caused by MCAS), but I'm not 100% sure on the timeline.
Boeing has had a stream of QA issues, the way MCAS was handled was idiotic, they are a shitty company.
But I have no issues flying in a Boeing.
I don't like or trust the company, but I trust the air authorities. And most of all, I trust the pilots.