The thing about UB is that many optimizations are possible precisely because the spec specified it as UB. And the spec did so in order to make these optimizations possible.

Codebases are not 6 lines long, they are hundreds of thousands. Without optimizations like those, many CPU cycles would be lost to unnecessary code being executed.

If you write C/C++, it is because you either hate yourself or the application’s performance is important, and these optimizations are needed.

The reason rust is so impressive nowadays is that you can write high performing code without risking accidentally doing UB. And if you are going to write code that might result in UB, you have to explicitly state so with unsafe. But for C/C++, there’s no saving. If you want your compiler to optimize code in those languages, you are going to have loaded guns pointing at your feet all the time.

I recently came across a rust book on how pointers aren’t just ints, because of UB.

fn main() {
    a = &1
    b = &2
    a++
    if a == b {
        *a = 3
        print(b)
    }
}

This may either: not print anything, print 3 or print 2.

Depending on the compiler, since b isn’t changed at all, it might optimize the print for print(2) instead of print(b). Even though everyone can agree that it should either not print anything or 3, but never 2.

If you want to use instructions from an extension (for example SIMD), you either: provide 2 versions of the function, or just won’t run in some CPUs. It would be weird for someone that doesn’t know about that to compile it for x86 and then have it not run on another x86 machine. I don’t think compilers use those instructions if you don’t tell them too.

Anyway, the SIMD the compilers will do is nowhere near the amount that it’s possible. If you manually use SIMD intrinsics/inline SIMD assembly, chances are that it will be faster than what the compiler would do. Especially because you are reducing the % of CPUs your program can run on.

Iirc Ubuntu names their home files “Downloads”, “Documents”, and so on. Same with windows (there are a lot of uppercase letters in windows files). I’ve had issues with Cargo.toml before. And not just cargo, many config files use case to signal priority (so if both Makefile and makefile exist, Makefile will be used (or other way around)). Downloaded files are a gamble. Files created by user input (so for example if I wanted my user to be “Calcopiritus”, my home would be “/home/Calcopiritus”.

Uppercase letters might not be common in filenames, but they are not nonexistent.

They are not created by people. They are created by programs.

I can make MY files all lowercase, but 99.999% of files on my computer are not created by me. And some of them have capital letters.

We need to differentiate between those cases because they are 2 distinct cases. And they are very different.

They don’t even have the same purpose. The purpose of a human learning is: fulfill a desire to learn or acquiring a new skill that will be useful to fulfill another desire. The purpose of AI learning is: increase the value of the model so it can be sold for more.

Lemmy is not an entity that is capable of thought. And I’m not Lemmy. I’m just another person and what you are reading is my opinion.

“Publishers are bad and greedy, therefore everything that hurts them is good for society” is a childish take imo. Not everything is black and white. Copyright exists for a reason. Just removing it won’t make the world better. A law being flawed doesn’t make it worse than not existing.

Don’t need to get philosophical about what is the difference between human and AI learning.

“Consumed by AI” and “consumed by a human” are two distinct use cases that can have different terms in a license.

Media is not exactly like cheese though. With cheese, you buy it and it’s yours. Media, however, is protected by copyright. When you watch a movie, you are given a license to watch the movie.

When an AI watches a movie, it’s not really watching it, it’s doing a different action. If the license of the movie says “you can’t use this license to train AI, use the other (more expensive) license for such purposes”, then AIs have extra fees to access the content that humans don’t have to pay.

So because you don’t understand it, everything it does should be legal?

It’s not rare maths. There are trns of thousands of AI experts. And most CS graduates (millions) have a good understanding on how they work, just not the specifics of the maths.

Yeah, they’re not selling a copy, they are just selling a subscription to a copying machine loaded with the information needed to make a copy. Totally different.

I should start a business of printers and attach a USB with the PNG of a dollar bill. And of course my printers won’t have any government mandated firmware that disables printing fake money.

I’m not printing fake money! It’s my clients! Totally legal.

Yeah. A human right.

Yeah, making sandwiches also costs money! I have to pay my sandwich making employees to keep the business profitable! How do they expect me to pay for the cheese?

EDIT: also, you completely missed my point. The money making machine is the AI because the copyright owners could just use them every time it produces copyright-protected material if we decided to take that route, which is what the parent comment suggested.

If the solution is making the output non-copyrighted it fixes nothing. You can sell the pirating machine on a subscription. And it’s not like Netflix where the content ends when the subscription ends, you have already downloaded all the not-copyrighted content you wanted, and the internet would be full of non-copyrighted AI output.

Instead of selling the bee movie, you sell a bee movie maker, and a spiderman maker, and a titanic maker.

Sure, file a copyright infringement each time you manage to make an AI output copyrighted content. Just run it on a loop and it’s a money making machine. That’s fine by me.

When you copy to consume yourself it’s way different than when you copy to sell the copy for a lower price.

I’ll train my AI on just the bee movie. Then I’m going to ask it “can you make me a movie about bees”? When it spits the whole movie, I can just watch it or sell it or whatever, it was a creation of my AI, which learned just like any human would! Of course I didn’t even pay for the original copy to train my AI, it’s for learning purposes, and learning should be a basic human right!

When you say "canse insensitive file*, do you mean lowercase files? Or is there an option?

Idk why we talking about mouses. When I’m on Linux, most of the time it’s through ssh.

This is the first time I’ve seen uppercase denoting scope. Usually it is done with a “_” or “__” prefix.

Casing styles usually mean different identifier types.

snake_case or pascalCase for functions and variables, CamelCase for types, UPPER_SNAKE_CASE for constants, and so on.

If we want to apply this to file systems, you could argue something like: CamelCase for directories, snake_case for files, pascalCase for symlinks, UPPER_SNAKE_CASE for hidden files.

I’m with windows on this one. Case insensitive is much more ergonomics with the only sacrifice represented by this meme. And a little bit of performance of course. But the ergonomics are worth it imo.

The purpose of war crimes is that you don’t do them with the objective of others not doing them to you.

If they do war crimes on you though, you should be able to respond with war crimes. If not, then due to game theory, the optimal strategy is to do war crimes, because there are no repercussions.

Vscode too