I don't see how this is different from current human poaching practices. i.e. It appears to be currently legal to hire an employee from company A who has been "tainted" by company A's [proprietary AI secrets/proprietary CPU architecture secrets/etc] in order to develop a competing offering for company B. i.e. It's not illegal for a human who worked at Intel for 20 years to go work for AMD even though they are certainly "tainted" with all sorts of copyrighted/proprietary knowledge that will surely leak through at AMD. Maybe patents are a first line of defense for company A, but that can't prevent adjacent solutions that aren't outright duplications and circumvent the patent.
I think there could be a market for "permissive/open models" in the future where a company specifically makes LLM models that are trained on a large corpus of public domain or permissively licensed text/code only and you can prove it by downloading the corpus yourself and reproducing the exact same model if desired. Proving that all MIT licensed code is non-infringing is probably impossible though at that point copyright law is meaningless because everyone would be in violation if you dig deep enough.
The problem with CLIs is that unless it's a super well documented CLI like `gh`, the LLM will have a hard time figuring out how to use it from `--help` alone unless it's a really simple tool. If you want to do something complex, like create a JIRA issue, you either need to put the full issue schema in `--help` so that the LLM knows how to pass an issue or else you can use MCP which bakes tool schemas into the protocol.
That's easily solved by wrapping it in a skill. And every time it fails, once you are done you ask it to update the skill with what it learned. A couple iterations later and it will be solid.
A state (not federal) house representative and her husband were murdered.
A state (not federal) senator and his wife were attempted murdered, but both survived and are expected to recover.
Your comment frames it as if 2 members of federal congress were assassinated which would have been a much bigger deal. State politicians being killed is still shocking and tragic, but try to be precise in your language as to not mislead.
This is surprising to me. Are you implying/saying it's no big deal that 2 elected officials were shot (one killed) because they are "only" state-level politicians?
This is not a good sign for democracy in the US. I think a healthy response would be protests, investigations, state and federal "comissions" looking into domestic political terrorism, etc. A whole lot of consequences. Instead there is nothing.
In contrast, in Brazil (not even a best example of a healthiest democracy) the assassination of a city councilwoman (city! not even state!) has been a dominant story in politics for many years and has never completely fallen out of public attention. It's been close to a decade!
I'm not one to quickly say "fascism" or to spell out doom but even to me this is a crystal clear sign of a system starting to fail...
It's a big deal, just not as big a deal as misleadingly implied. "The capitol building was bombed!" (implying Washington DC) vs "The capitol building [of Alaska] was bombed!" would both be big deals, but one is a much bigger deal than the other.
It might not be 100% lies, it might be "based on a true story". The temptation to embellish/frame yourself as the faultless protagonist is instinctive and there are hundreds of examples of people doing it. Narrative shifts are super common in cases where facts are initially sparse and then more come to light... we don't have the whole context.
Surprised this story has not been flagged as it's essentially political flamebait - an uncorroborated, unverifiable account from a single person trashing the current US administration and causing everyone to pile on their hot takes and equally unverifiable and possibly embellished anecdotes.
...unless you run afoul of any of their many obscure laws, even unintentionally. I had a relative travel to Japan with his family. He's into locksport (watches Lock Picking Lawyer, etc). He had some lock picking paraphernalia on his person that he forgot about since he just carries it around 24/7 without thinking about it. Long story short, they were discovered in a metal detector at some point and Japanese security whisked him away to an interrogation room. He tried to explain locksport and youtube but the Japanese police were incredulous. He spent a full day in Japanese detention (leaving his wife and kids stranded in Tokyo without him) and at one point it was looking like he might be facing more serious charges, but then luckily someone from an American military base was able to bail him out somehow.
This doesn't seem like an "obscure" law to me. In fact if this is a hobby of yours I would expect you to understand that it's not legal in a number of places.
It was an honest mistake, especially for someone who rarely travels.
It could happen to anyone in a country where possessing lock picks is not a criminal act. For example, your sibling might get you some picks in credit card form factor one year for Christmas. You put them in your wallet and forget about them. You travel a bit within the USA and nobody cares. Then years later you travel to Japan and are whisked away to jail because of a thing you forgot about in your wallet. The Japanese don't understand why an innocent civilian would ever have such a thing; therefore you must be a nefarious criminal.
Yeah but we currently have a $2T deficit. We could do all sorts of good for "less than 10% of the DoD's annual budget", but we are already spending far more money than we bring in. The DoD's budget needs to be reduced by like 50% (along with a lot of other departments/programs) to have even a hope of getting debt under control, let alone introducing new "think of the children" expenses
Well, years later the website is still operational and the company still seems functional after Musk cut 80+% of the staff, which to me is pretty mind blowing. I'd call that pretty successful. If I, as the end user, can't tell the difference between pre-80% and post-80% cut twitter then what value was that 80% bringing to the organization, exactly?
Well, it's an incredibly unpleasant place to be, the curation is terrible, ads are dregs of the internet, and they no longer allow public access to the site or API in any meaningful way. Yay.
Lost massive amount of revenue so other financial partners on the deal had to write it down substantially- is losing money a successful investment in your book?
