All men are apes, but not all apes are men.
Great American humorist. C# developer. Open source enthusiast.
XMPP: [email protected]
Mastodon: [email protected]
Blog: jordanwages.com
All men are apes, but not all apes are men.
I know it’s pandering to my millennial nostalgia, but they’re doing it so well.
Because I don’t know why it is closed source. Is it a personal project? A private project? A sensitive project? I don’t see a moral imperative for any of those to be free and open to all users.
If I release something free of restrictions to the world as a gift, that is my prerogative. And a third party’s actions don’t affect my ability to do whatever I want with the original code, nor the users of their product’s ability to do what they want with my code. And the idea of “property” here is pretty abstract. What is it you own when you purchase software? Certainly not everything. Probably not nothing. But there is a wide swath in between in which reasonable people can disagree.
If you are an intellectual property abolitionist, I doubt there is much I can say to change your mind.
I’m not sure what you are referring to about ontologically bad. Has someone said this?
I’m going by the vibe of the comments of people here who are generally anti-MIT. That the very nature of allowing someone to use your code in a closed-source project without attribution is bad. Phrasing it as “hiding their copyright infringement”, for example, implies that it is copyright infringement per se regardless of the license or the spirit in which it was released.
Not all of us write code simply for monetary gain and some of us have philosophical differences on what you can and should own as far as the public commons goes. And not all of us view closed derivatives as a ontologically bad.
The investors that matter, probably. I have little doubt it will be the “little guy” who has a 401k with Boeing investments that takes the hit. The C-suite executives will have golden parachutes, and anyone powerful/rich enough will either insider trade it away or get bailed out.
Don’t we provide all the weapons? We could definitely stop doing that and at least force Israel to find another source for weaponry if they insist on continuing.
Just recommended the audio book to my library. Thanks.
figured better to not bother than to “um, akchually” this one
gonna get the internet police sicked on you for sure.
“Both good and bad news about Biden is out there. I prefer to share the bad news. But you know that already.” (Emphasis mine)
I cannot see how that is an admission of bad faith (or dishonest as the mod said in the original post) in any fair interpretation. Unless you are defining “bad faith” as “something I disagree with” or “something that hurts my argument”.
Looking at the documentation it looks like it relies on Mistral’s python tooling to work. I’m fairly dumb, so I don’t know if the tool suggestion coming from Mistral is from some kind of separate neural net or as some kind of special response you have to parse (or that their client parses for you?).
Very disappointing. This is a politics group, not a news group. Politics is entirely about opinion and views on how to operate society. This is exactly the place for someone to post content that aligns with their political, moral, and philosophical views, even if that doesn’t align with your own. There is no such thing as a neutral observer in politics, and trying to force it just biases this group toward what the moderators view as “neutral” through their own biases. While bad faith posting (spam, etc) is a concern, it needs to be clearly defined and distinguished from simply expressing strong political opinions. Silencing voices for perceived bias undermines the purpose of political discussion.
Mistral Instruct v0.3 added in function calling, but I don’t know if its method for implementation is the same/compatible. Also, it is fairly new and wasn’t released all that long ago. Hopefully we’ll get there soon. :)
If borrowers are unable to afford a down payment, that almost certainly means they have very little financial flexibility.
Possibly. It might also deplete their only source of financial flexibility, too.
Plenty of non-white people here that aren’t immigrants that are having children.
Just because an idea is old, doesn’t mean its a bad idea. And we do have mechanisms for modifying the constitution. We just don’t do it often because it requires a lot of agreement.
Where is everyone calling you a Russian shill now, @[email protected]? LOL
edit: My point is that people only give @[email protected] shit when he post’s anything mildly critical of Biden, but not when he posts anything else. Wasn’t calling him a Russian shill.
The Supreme Court isn’t really interested in arguments, it seems. They’re starting at conclusions and working backwards. In a sane world, you’re probably right with the logic. But in a sane world we wouldn’t have made it to this point to begin with.