I pressed C-c accidentally during the upgrade(wrong terminal) and it broke the entire system(had to manually change a few files rebuild initramfs to be able to boot). I would take the complexity of Nix without a thought.
This is exactly what I do. After seeing how much of my internal network was exposed in certificate transparency logs, I noped out and just do a DNS challenge for a wildcard for almost everything.
Now it’s have a nice script that distributes my key automatically to 20 or so hosts and apps and have a real SSL cert on everything from my UDM Pro to my Synology to random Raspberry Pis running containers. Most of which have domain names that only resolve on my local network.
This is made possible by a fairly robust DNS setup that consists of not only giving A records to all my hosts automatically, but also adding in CNAMEs for services and blocking almost all outbound DNS, DNS over TLS, DoH, etc.
Like another commenter I also use it for initial exploration in uncharted territory.
For coding only helpful with autocompleting error strings. Even then, it messes with normal auto-complete, might get rid of it.
Well, no such thing as stable addresses since you don't really own IP addresses, you are leasing from RIR.
But, if you are fine with APNIC allocation, see if RIPE PI Allocation is sufficient for you, they are much cheaper(RIPE charges $50/yr), add some LIR cost, total would be <$100/yr.
Yeah I'm aware you don't really own IP addresses just as you don't really own domain names. In both cases there is degrees of stability you can expect though. I'll look take a look at RIPE, thanks.
It's not a thing now, but it used to be a great deal to thing around 2006-2008. 1000 sms packs used to be sold for 36 rupee and they sold like hotcakes.
Can you not mitm the CA's dns lookups for http, tls-alpn challenges and make them sign the certificates for you? How does letsencrypt prevent this? Do they check with multiple resolvers around the world?
The difference is if you build tools that can be used to violate existing copyright laws your tool will get taken offline by the same corporations. Yet they are selling one that can be used to do so.
Yes, I agree there's a measure of double standards to this. It's why I feel it's important that AI does not remain in the control of just a handful of corporations. The decks are stacked against though, given how data and compute intensive SOTA is.
But in defense of copilot, code regurgitation is uncommon in routine use. An editor extension allowing search of github would be at least as easy to use to violate licenses but I do not think it'd be taken down since that would not be its core offering.
Copilot goes far beyond mere search and provides a useful service. GPT-3 can also be prompted into generating copyrighted works of writers but I do not see people talking as if that is its primary utility nor as much clamoring in these forums to end that service.
> An editor extension allowing search of github would be at least as easy to use to violate licenses
Well, try doing that for music or movies or proprietary leaked codebase.
If you think copilot is uniquely producing things that are not that different from humans then surely no one would have any problem with feeding it massive amounts of corporate programs?
I am not aware what writers are doing but there have been plenty of uproar regarding stable diffusion. I have a feeling that if any tools like this get built for musicians/film-makers, it will look vastly different from the current situation.
First, the music and to an extent movie industry enforcement of IP are uniquely pathological. But I am not talking about music or movies. I am contending that a simple search extension being much less capable than Copilot and so even more scopeable as aiding copyright violation would not be taken down.
> surely no one would have any problem with feeding it massive amounts of corporate programs?
There is a similar gymnastics done by human engineers today due to the issue of patents. I don't think this is a good trend to uphold.
> I am not aware what writers are doing but there have been plenty of uproar regarding stable diffusion
Yes but mostly in the art community. On HN there were plenty of arguments just the other day how it is not the same for art and programmers have a stronger case. I disagree but regardless, the case is exactly equivalent for GPT-3 and writers but it wasn't an issue generating about a thousand comments on respecting IP and ceasing deployment of LLMs until copilot.
> There is a similar gymnastics done by human engineers today due to the issue of patents. I don't think this is a good trend to uphold.
Are you arguing that copyright laws should be abolished? I have no problem with that as long as it's clearly defined, you can't not respect copyright of open source code but enforce it for proprietary code, just because the value is arguably non-monetary.
Exactly, it would actually benefit many C/C++ programmers. Some components of NT are very high quality, why not wash their license if the aim is to empower the programmers and also make some profit?
