You suggested that if you don’t attack any other country, then you don’t have to worry about getting attacked.
Ukraine didn’t attack anyone, but that did not keep them safe from being attacked. Clearly not attacking anyone doesn’t mean you don’t have to worry about being attacked.
A lot of words to not say much of anything to defend the actual point - what can AI actually do that we couldn't do before? Is it just that we can make new tech startups faster? Is that a good thing?
>
A lot of words to not say much of anything to defend the actual point - what can AI actually do that we couldn't do before?
The article indirectly considers the point:
What could an electrical motor do in a factory that a steam engine couldn't? - There is hardly anything.
But: by tranforming the factory from a central steam engine into one electrical motor per factory machine over a long time, the production process(es) got more efficient - and this is hoped for AI, too.
Of course the idea of many motors powering many machines didn't escape anyone during that period. It wasn't practical until motor technology improved.
Given that we're in the "inefficient motor era", per the analogy, what is the blatantly obvious next business innovation that is currently held back by needing a small improvement (say, faster token generation) from AI?
> what is the blatantly obvious next business innovation that is currently held back by needing a small improvement (say, faster token generation) from AI?
I would personally say: at least the capability for a fast generation of images (designs) - even if not perfect - does have potential considering how much professional designers charge for generating concept designs.
Even if you hire a professional designer to create the final version, the fact that I can generate, say, 10-20 design concepts to see which ones I like, and then go to a professional designer to make a final version based on the AI concept saves a lot of time and money.
I know some people still underestimate these tools, but this is pretty adjacent to telling someone with a 20mile commute to just walk everyday instead.
I have at least walked 20 miles before in my life. I've never written anything with as much breadth in 20 years of coding until I started using these tools. I also have quite a deep backlog from trying.
> Well, you might want to throw that entire repository away and restore it from a backup before the offending commit because it's so difficult to fix and guarantee that it's not hiding in there somewhere and while also not breaking something else.
Perhaps proving the point here. That's not enough to eliminate the secret, the dangling commit will persist. Though this might be a nitpick, it's rather hard to get it from the remote without knowing the SHA.
> generate a new key
Is absolutely the right answer. If you pushed a key, you should treat it as already compromised and rotate it.
Of course is not true - look into git filter branch. I had to use it once when a developer checked in a whole bunch of binaries and created a PR which ended being merged. I had to rewrite the history and delete the files from history - just deleting the files would not suffice because the file were in git history and we’re taking too m&ch space.
Trump bombing hundreds of people or someone throwing a bomb at Trump because he keeps bombing hundreds of people?