Why would the Democrats do that?

If you need it in order to do what the user asked, you don't need the popup. The user asking to do a thing is consent to do what is obviously necessary to accomplish that thing, and may be consent to do what is less obviously necessary. The user's click on "sign in with google" is consent to share data with Google as needed to complete the sign-in, but no more - it's not consent to Google Analytics.

Legal bases for processing: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-6-gdpr/ Everyone knows part A because that's a catch-all. If the user requested something, it's better UX to use Part B. Parts C and F apply sometimes. You still have to follow the rest of the GDPR, like letting them delete it.

They don't. The GDPR doesn't mention any specific UX.

I happened to work with people who elaborated the GDPR rules and they knew very well that it would end with cookie banners everywhere, or mandatory logins.

Could be a vice signal. People who know safe AI is less profitable might not want to invest in safe AI.

Elon is probably pitching that angle pretty hard.

and it sounds like "cash money"

That probably depends on what is being displayed... at some point I had sounds of USB connect/disconnect (possibly from the Windows 7 era).

I think GP is referring to the name of the site, which sounds like "cash money" if you pronounce it with a thick American accent.

Indeed, I just understood the same when reading it again... I answered too quickly

That would be amazing and really cement the proven value of Rust.

There's even a project for a deliberately OpenSSL drop-in compatible Rustls backed library. It is intended for specific projects because OpenSSL is sprawling and they don't implement most if it, but in principle if you use the same parts of OpenSSL your C likely works with this safer + faster alternative today, why not recommend it to your users.

https://github.com/rustls/rustls-openssl-compat

Browser extensions come from the Chrome/Firefox addon store, though and not through distros.

And maybe that's why we have the problem that is being discussed ? No third party that would audit and build extensions from source.

Everybody seems to hate distributions though.

If someone walks up to the owner in a restaurant and offers to pay them money to buy the restaurant, it's not considered suspicious.

Assuming the someone is private equity buying out, I expect the quality to drop like a stone and the place to go to hell.

So. It's not suspicious. But you can rest assured as a customer it isn't good news

(that doesn't make it wrong to sell ofc)

Not the same thing.

Was this ironically written by AI?

> The labor market isn't adjusting. It's snapping.

> MMLU, tokens per dollar, release intervals. The actual capability and infrastructure metrics. All linear. No pole. No singularity signal.

Maybe it was, maybe he just writes that way. At some point somebody will read so much LLM text that they will start emulating AI unknowingly.

I just don’t care anymore. If the article is good I will continue reading it, if it’s bad I will stop. I don’t care if a machine or a human produced unpleasant reading material.

I really hate that the first example has become a de facto tell for LLMs, because it's a perfectly fine rhetorical device.

It is a perfectly fine rhetorical device, and I don't consider a text that just has that to be automatically LLM-made. However, it is also a powerful rhetorical device, and I find that the average human writer right now is better at using these than whatever LLM most people use to generate essays. It's supposed to signify a contrast, a mood shift, something impactful, but LLMs tend to spam these all over the place, as if trying to maximize the number of times the readers gasp. It's too intense in its writing, and that's what stands out the most.

That's interesting -- I'll have to keep an eye out for it.