RE: https://mastodon.social/@JamesWidman/116542802636202217

psa: the term "open source" means that there is some _source_ information (like the source code of a computer program) whose license permits anyone to copy, inspect, use, modify, and re-distribute the source information.

so in the context of LLMs, "open source" implies that you have a license to copy, inspect, use, modify, and re-distribute any **training data** used to generate a model.

if LLM proponents _don't_ mean that, then they're making fraudulent use of the term "open source".

Would you be interested in an **early** preview of the design we're converging on for Carbon's memory safety model?

If so, Josh on the Carbon team is planning to give a 2 hour talk covering:
- What the design is
- How it prevents use after free and data races
- What expressivity we expect it to support
- How it will support a transition from C++

It will only lightly cover comparisons with Rust's memory safety approach.

Again, this is an early preview, before we have started on implementation or even a more polished end-to-end write-up. Some of the design may change, and there are still some open questions, but the core looks reasonably solid and very promising.

What we are hoping to achieve with the presentation:
- Get folks up to speed on what we are thinking.
- Getting feedback earlier in our process while making changes is easier.
- Help us refine our exposition.

This talk will not go into:
- How we arrived at this design
- Concerns we had with alternatives we considered
- How the design will be implemented

We are totally okay if you would rather wait until we are further along -- we hope to give regular updates to the community. Also, while this session won't be recorded, we do plan to record the presentation in case you'd prefer to consume a video instead of attending live. And last but not least, our next step is a reasonably polished and complete written design if you would prefer to read a document.

We also expect detailed feedback on our approach and how we are describing the approach would mostly be asynchronous after you've had some time to digest the talk. We only expect to have time for minimal initial reactions and clarifying questions given the depth and complexity of the subject. Our plan is to follow-up afterward in email and/or a document to collect this feedback.

If you're interested in attending live, please put when would work for you here: https://www.when2meet.com/?36904183-wO2j2 and DM me or reach out on our Discord server: https://discord.com/channels/655572317891461132/708431848715452476

We'll post an update with the time(s) selectad and the join link (we use Google Meet for better or worse) to that Discord channel.

Oh, we're not calling it "Protest" any more but "Anti Migrant unrest"....which kinda makes it sound like it's the Migrant's fault, and not that of the White People harassing them?

#PoliceScotland #Whiteness #WhiteNationalism #Fascism #Pogroms #WhiteRiot #FarageRiots #ScotPol #UKPol #UKPolitics

RE: https://infosec.exchange/@josephcox/116731857107771061

tldr: they’re all using training sets derived from one specific training set (WildChat) generated by ChatGPT 3.5 that contains several generated stories about this character. It’s a feedback loop of synthetic training data.

I was just thinking about what we might call "policy fallacies", in the same way we think about logical fallacies. The "Carbon Footprint Fallacy" is the belief that systemic problems externalized by large actors can be mitigated by individual personal responsibility, might sum up as "The whole idea of AI literacy is just the Carbon Footprint Fallacy".

Or, the idea that government can be run like a business the same way submarines can fly like airplanes might be the "Flying Submarine Fallacy."