signals. thinking about shifting my mental framework to identify signals instead of waiting for concepts to be assembled. exploring the amount of energy and opportunities for distractions through the operations of processing what just happened and what is happening to short circuit latent and unnecessary systems. cut through the assembly processes and identify the raw signals. recognizing that naming these "raw signals" is misleading. maybe, shifting observability lower in the stack.
Any conversation
Still in Quebec City, which has a pretty sizable street population once you come down from the hill where the tour groups go. We had to basically step over some guys sharing a glass pipe on the only stairs up the hill yesterday; I have teenagers so this bothered me.
Later, my youngest and I were talking and he says "why don't the police do something about that?"
I never have enough time but I’d love to do a bit more recreational programming with esoterical languages like kitten, , and . AoC and Project Euler are good because they just require an answer but there’s also loads of simple puzzles online that rely on being able to submit the code in common languages. I’ve been wondering, however, if I could use an LLM to take those problems and create a verification harness for any language I like.
a Gemma 4 a Google tulajdona, nem tárol más adatot, csak amiről a gépen fogom a Rezső nevű OpenClaw ügynököt kérdezgetni, helyileg azt sem itt tartja, hanem a felhőnek csúfolt infrastruktúrában, ami legvalószínűbben valamelyik brazíliai esőerdőben foglal helyet vagy Finnországban
Gemma 4 is owned by Google, it doesn't store any other data, except what I'll ask the OpenClaw agent named Rezső about on the machine, it doesn't keep it locally either, but in the infrastructure mocked as the cloud, which is most likely located in a Brazilian rainforest or in Finland
I wonder if there is a way, sane and friendly way, to prove that a piece of software is only accessing whatever it claims it will access.
Like network addresses or file system access. I want to be able to claim in my software that it only touches this or that file and I can prove it
I believe the sanest and friendliest way would be for it to be open-source so it can be audited.
I know, and that's totally fine, but it is not always friendly. I guess an agent can "audit" it.
Just the fact that it can be audited plus your word is enough. Noone would need to look any further, because they could if they had to.
I think a trusted piece of software such as your operating system should be in charge of managing permissions. For example, I believe with Wayland on gnome you no longer need to promise you aren't secretly taking screenshots of the whole monitor and shipping it somewhere because to do that Wayland requires you to get user permission.
hello world ~ i'm a web developer from midwest, usa. it's been awhile since i worked on anything. since the i've been working my way up the ladder at a blue-collar job; i was promoted to team lead last week. but as i browse hacker news everyday, my cravings for web development increases.
Hello to friends. Holla for tools.
👨💻 : , , and Pragmata Pro
💪 : NotePlan
🎧 : Overcast
🧠 : Allume
🖋️ : Mark Two (EDC), Pen Type-B
🌳 : Anisota