placing constraints upon them not only helps users and services build trust in them, but it also helps people more easily conceptualise what they do.

Our fourth metric, an index constructed from WeirdML V2 results, showed no sign of acceleration. A single global linear trend fit the data best.

Many AI labs (including OpenAI and Anthropic) largely depend on these hyperscalers for access to R&D and inference compute.

since reasoning models and agentic AI can rack up quite a bill

what makes the LLM a disciplined wiki maintainer rather than a generic chatbot.

AI is no longer limited by ideas. It's limited by money, compute, and who can scale fastest.

In order to select the most appropriate repository for a particular use case, all potential users benefit from being able to easily find and access information on the scope, target user community, policies, and capabilities of the data repository

The red curve in the right panel of Fig.3 shows a more realistic trajectory for theeconomy in the face of a steady physicalscale. In this example, non-physical activitiesare allowed to comprise 75% of the economybefore saturating. Although this upperlimit is arbitrary, its exact value does notchange the resulting saturation of the overalleconomy.

If you are okay with the user appending arbitrary query params without enforcing an allow-list, you can bypass the strong params requirement by using request.params directly:

My main purpose for using note-cards is to form lines of poetry into actual poems. Currently it's specifically erotic poetry that I'm writing, so it seems like there is a limited number of categories that I keep coming back to in regards to content: beauty, fashion, movement, relationship, etc, which I've put on the top of my index cards. This is based off of Ryan Holiday and Robert Greene's index card systems. I've also added subcategories: for example, beauty and myth, beauty and plant associations, etc. Going deeper, I might write B-P-F in the corner for Beauty-Plant-Flower, and then have BPF-1, 2, etc. If I organize these alphabetically with tabs, it seems like it would be easy to find the subject I'm looking for at a glance. One problem might be if I want to start making additional notes about which cards stand out for their structure: rhyme, alliteration, etc. Have various ideas for this.My questions are: what is the benefit of having an alphanumeric indexing system where you label subjects with 1, 2, 3, and then going deeper with 1a, 1a1, etc. when it seems like it would be harder to remember that science is #1 and philosophy is #2 vs. just putting science under S and philosophy under P? Is the Zettelkasten (alphanumeric) method better for creating a wide-ranging general knowledge database in a way I'm not realizing? Would there be any benefit for my narrower writing purpose? Any responses are appreciated.

He didn’t just put his notes anywhere, but rather, in a place that made sense at the time, near something related, even if this was not the only or even best place for the note to go in the long term. Again, this difficulty of there being no one, best place for a particular note was addressed through the use of cross-links between notes, making it so that any given note could "exist" in more than one spot.

As he told Keyboard, in 1981, “Any constraint is part of the skeleton that you build the composition on—including your own incompetence.”

name but a few.

(optional)

EBEAM_COLUMN

least one person

needs

Some people eventually realize that the code quality is important, but they lack of the time to do it. This is the typical situation when you work under pressure or time constrains. It is hard to explain to you boss that you need another week to prepare your code when it is “already working”. So you ship the code anyway because you can not afford to spent one week more.

Data integrity is a good thing. Constraining the values allowed by your application at the database-level, rather than at the application-level, is a more robust way of ensuring your data stays sane.

It's vanilla JS, doesn't bind you to specifc syntax and that's the main reason why I like svelte that it doesn't try to sandbox you into framework constraints.

oh by the way did i tell you it's hard like probably it's it's also really hard but i really don't want to stop here on a on a low note

If you want to run a full fletched linux OS on the ipad an option is to jailbreak the ipad and try to install linux. This is hard because Apple does not want you to and a failed installation might render the ipad useless. Also you will not be able to run any iOS apps anymore obviously.

# authenticated :user, lambda {|u| u.role == "admin"} do # root to: "admin/dashboard#show", as: :user_root # end

Your Rails app Gemfile may have a line requiring sass-rails 5.0: gem 'sass-rails', '~> 5.0' # or gem 'sass-rails', '~> 5' These will prevent upgrade to sprockets 4, if you'd like to upgrade to sprockets 4 change to: gem 'sass-rails', '>= 5'

utilizing the fact that the same origin policy is not enforced within server-to-server communication

JSONP is a relic of the past and shouldn’t be used due to numerous limitations (e.g., being able to send GET requests only) and many security concerns (e.g., the server can respond with whatever JavaScript code it wants — not necessarily the one we expect — which then has access to everything in the context of the window, including localStorage and cookies).

Adding layer of settings and complexity for the end user might also bring bad practices to keep a comfortable use of app’s by installing snap without confinement…

You can either use require to bypass typescript special import.

at least in the meantime allow users to bypass the security protections in situations where they are confident of the source of the layers

When I'm prototyping components I like to manage the data where it appears, and not send it back and forth if there is no reason for it. I also don't like to be forced by a language to do things a certain way.

Svelte forces you do to do all kinds of things in a very specific way (as does every other framework/library), those constraints generally make for a better experience.

JavaScript is, of course, a dynamic language that allows you to add and remove objects and their members at any point in time. For many, this is precisely why they enjoy the language: there are very few constraints imposed by the language.

Ideally: Only let a parent control those specific CSS properties, and never let a child use them on the root element.

margin, flex, position, left, right, top, bottom, width, height, align-self, justify-self among other is CSS properties that should never be modified by the child itself. The parent should always have control of those properties, which is the whole reason I'm asking for this.

By adding constraints, we have managed to create a simple API and a performant output.

Instead, my purpose is to illustrate why an alternative approach — based on Single File Components with real CSS — is so damn delightful.

Designing with constraints. Using inline styles, every value is a magic number. With utilities, you're choosing styles from a predefined design system, which makes it much easier to build visually consistent UIs.

This task disables two-factor authentication (2FA) for all users that have it enabled. This can be useful if GitLab’s config/secrets.yml file has been lost and users are unable to log in, for example.

While there are security benefits to disallowing unsigned extensions by default, it is not clear why there is no option to turn off this behavior, perhaps by making it configurable only with administrator rights.

It would be best to offer an official way to allow installing local, unsigned extensions, and make the option configurable only by root, while also showing appropiate warnings about the potential risks of installing unsigned extensions.

I know, you don't trust Mozilla but do you also not trust the developer? I absolutely do! That is the whole point of this discussion. Mozilla doesn't trust S3.Translator or jeremiahlee but I do. They blocked page-translator for pedantic reasons. Which is why I want the option to override their decision to specifically install few extensions that I'm okay with.

As I see it, we've got 3 solutions in front of us currently to have in-line translation:

They don't have to host the extension on their website, but it's absolutely and utterly unacceptable for them to interfere with me choosing to come to github and install it.

I appreciate the vigilance, but it would be even better to actually publish a technical reasoning for why do you folks believe Firefox is above the device owner, and the root user, and why there should be no possibility through any means and configuration protections to enable users to run their own code in the release version of Firefox.

It should be possible to implement the functionality of page-translator via a more popular extension that is designed to inject arbitrary data into websites, including remote code, e.g. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/greasemonkey/ .

I appreciate the vigilance, but it would be even better to actually publish a technical reasoning for why do you folks believe Firefox is above the device owner, and the root user, and why there should be no possibility through any means and configuration protections to enable users to run their own code in the release version of Firefox.

We must consider introducing sensible default options in Firefox, while also educating users and allowing them to override certain features, instead of placing marginal security benefits above user liberties and free choice.

To load one temporarily go to about:debugging, "This Firefox" and click "Load temporary add-on from file". More permanently: many (most?) Linux distributions allow unsigned extensions to be placed in /usr/lib/firefox/browser/extensions/ and they will automatically be loaded, provided they have valid names (e.g. dodgy@unsignedextension.com.xpi).

to give direct aid to an individual in comprehending complex situations, isolating the significant factors, and solving problems

, constraint

Perpetual progress is a strong statement of the transhumanist commitment to seek “more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in healthy directions without bound.”

The analysis found that those organizations using separate standards showed greater integration performance compared with organizations that did not use combined standards.

practice

Flexibility