What a joke. A sovereign cloud in the EU has to be owned by an EU company without ties to foreign entities, especially those that hose data or other services for it.
AWS's "foreign cloud" will just be another AI training pot for the NSA.
Empty of MOPs? (Member of parliament) Is the public allowed to attend such hearings? If so, I doubt it'll be empty.
If the EU commission hears about this, it might trigger another investigation. Hopefully Malus gets whacked over the head repeatedly.
When will people stop giving Malus, the evil company, money?
That might also be the case, but that then raises the question of the quality of PRs in order to judge the contribution quality of "anonymous" contributors.
From the post's link:
We hypothesized that pull requests made by women are less likely to be accepted than those made by men. Prior work on gender bias in hiring – that women tend to have resumes less favorably evaluated than men (5) – suggests that this hypothesis may be true.
To evaluate this hypothesis, we looked at the pull status of every pull request submitted by women compared to those submitted by men. We then calculate the merge rate and corresponding confidence interval, using the Clopper-Pearson exact method (15), and find the following:
Open Closed Merged Merge Rate 95% Confidence Interval Women 8,216 21,890 111,011 78.6% [78.45%, 78.87%] Men 150,248 591,785 2,181,517 74.6% [74.56%, 74.67%]
4 percentage point difference overall.
Pull requests can be made by anyone, including both insiders (explicitly authorized owners and collaborators) and outsiders (other GitHub users). If we exclude insiders from our analysis, the women’s acceptance rate (64.4%) continues to be significantly higher than men’s (62.7%) (χ2(df = 2, n = 2, 473, 190) = 492, p < .001)
Emphasis mine. that's 1.7 percentage points.
The final paragraph also omits how the acceptance changes after gender is "revealed" (username, profile image). The graph doesn't help either
For outsiders, we see evidence for gender bias: women’s acceptance rates are 71.8% when they use gender neutral profiles, but drop to 62.5% when their gender is identifiable. There is a similar drop for men, but the effect is not as strong. Women have a higher acceptance rate of pull requests overall (as we reported earlier), but when they’re outsiders and their gender is identifiable, they have a lower acceptance rate than men.
So women drop from 71.8% to 62.5% = 9,3 percentage points, and they say it's more than men, but don't reveal the difference. Only graph has an indication (unless I'm missing a table) and it may be 5 (?) percentage points for men. Which would be about 4 percentage points between both genders.
 |
|---|
| Figure 5: Pull request acceptance rate by gender and perceived gender, with 95% Clopper-Pearson confidence intervals, for insiders (left) and outsiders (right) |
The conclusion:
Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.
That's quite exaggerated for <=5 percentage points. Especially for the number of people involved.
Out of 4,037,953 GitHub user profiles with email addresses, we were able to identify 1,426,121 (35.3%) of them as men or women through their public Google+ profiles.
Maybe I missed it, but how many of those were women and how many made PRs?
in a 2013 survey of the more than 2000 open source developers who indicated a gender, only 11.2% were women
Let's compare the PR rate per gender:
Let's say the percentage of women did not increase since 2013, which I'd find difficult to believe, that's 1,269,247 men and 156,873 women. Men made 150,248 + 591,785 + 2,181,517 = 2,923,550 PRs. Women made 8,216 + 21,890 + 111,011 = 141,117 PRs. That's ~2.3 PRs per man and ~0,9 PRs per woman. If the percentage changed and more women became contributors, that would decrease the PRs per woman.
That leads me to ask:
- are women more hesitant to contribute PRs that might not be merged? if so, it might contribute to why their PRs are merged more often
- are the women with accounts on github more likely to be people who have some kind of education in the IT field? if there are less hobbyist women (percentage-wise) on github, and more hobbyist men who just chuck their stuff online then decide to contribute to a project, it might contribute to PR acceptance (you're comparing pros to amateurs)
- what does a similar acceptance rate for double the amount of PRs for men actually say? I don't know, but it might be pertinent.
I very much encourage humans to contribute to opensource. So, while this paper says something about the current state of things, it doesn't seem like it's saying much. The differences in pull request acceptance are not very significant (<5 percentage points) to me
A huge RISC-V market emerges?
It's dead easy. Yet github didn't do it when training copilot and are now sued because of it.
It is also easy to build a database of copyrighted material and check that revealed training data marches it. The copyright licence doesn't necessarily need to be attached. It just makes it easier to spot.
Also, what are you arguing here? That because copyright is easy to ignore, it should be or that it's pointless? Is that the advice you'd give anybody else too? "You know what Disney, everyone ignores copyright, so why not make everything public domain?"
With text, it's possible to trick the AI to reveal its license or for it to just print the license unprompted (like Github's CoPilot), but with music, how is anybody going to detect it?
From what I understand LLMs are just large heuristic machines. They gather a lot of statistics on token order and return an answer to that with something that statistically should higher than other options. There's no "understanding". So to answer your question, no, they don't understand the license.
Content is most likely scraped wholesale from websites, possibly run through some clean up to possibly filter out absolute garbage, and fed into an LLM to train it. An LLM can be tricked to reveal its training data (e.g repeat "fruit" forever). It's in those cases where copyright infringement is detected and if action can and has be taken. There are court cases currently in review, the most popular being the one against Github Copilot for infringing on the license of sourcecode it ingested.
Never heard of it, but I use DeepL, which isn't OSS, but at least it's not google and it's better at translating.
They might not even have to. I bet there are bots already having entire discussions by themselves on there.
Makes sense. It's the USAtion of the world. Their puritanism is spreading. Wouldn't surprise me if people started censoring themselves when saying "moist", but getting excited when talking about guns, wars, and bombing the middle east.
Yes, we do need competition. I'd much prefer it to be peertube, but this will do... for now.
The EU is on fire with smacking these mega-corps. I hope they will prevail.
My only question is: why?
Edit: maybe a second question: are you asking for a code review?
They are not the only ones. I've seen a few other alternative forges that haven't bothered dogfooding. It immediately lowers the trust in them. Does their shit really work if they have to host it on github?
Good job 👍 Looks very well done!
I don't wish the pain of Gecko upon any non-Mozilla dev. That shit is terrible (and terribly documented).
Yes please. Shoot yourself in the foot. It seems like it's the only way people will even consider switching.
I feel like there are many devs out there who expose a lot of personal details and opinions all over the web. Maybe it's just me, but when starting out with the internet I tried my best to separate my personal details (name, age, sex, country, ethnicity, family ties, relationship status,...) from usernames in public.
Seeing devs do it willingly and voice opinions on divisive or sensitive topics kind of messes with me. Aren't y'all afraid of missing out on job opportunities if someone reads your opinions, code, or other stuff tied to your personal accounts? Or letting anybody (maybe family, friends, acquaintances, ...) in on your personal life, mindset, opinions and other personal information?
Hello everyone! I really like the ideas behind IPFS and I want to share some feedback about the design of the IPFS. The core of the problem is that CID concept is wrong in it’s current implementation. I know it sounds blunt and harsh so let me clarify: IPFS at its core claims to be a content add...
TL;DR IPFS's "content addresses" don't actually address the content but a tree of the content stored in a protocol buffer, making it impossible to convert a hash to a content address.
DHT of CIDs? More like a Distributed Table of Lies!
It seems like every other week a game studio is massively laying off employees; sometimes after years of development. What I'm reading is that it's a quick way to lower expenses and pad the investors' pockets, flooding the market with developers and reducing their value, to then hire them back a few months later at lower salaries.
So, what's holding back gamedevs from banding together to either unionize or start their own companies with better conditions that the purely money-driven studios? Why aren't they trying to be better? Nobody willing to invest in them? Does starting a company together mean they will now be the bosses who have to answer to the investors, ensure returns, and fire employees? Is the world just an entire shit-cake?
Some projects have been DMCA'ed and hosting them on I2P could be a viable alternative.
Introduction Open source doesn’t just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open source software must comply with the following criteria: 1. Free Redistribution The licens…
There has been a lot of talk about companies and individuals adopting licenses that aren't OSI opensource to protect themselves from mega-corp leechers. Developers have also been condemned who put donation notices in the command-line or during package installation. Projects with opensource cores and paid extensions have also been targets of vitriol.
So, let's say we wanted to make it possible for the majority of developers to work on software that strictly follows the definition of opensource, which models would be acceptable to make enough money to work on those projects full-time?
Fair-code is not a software license. It describes a software model where software:
- is generally free to use and can be distributed by anybody
- has its source code openly available
- can be extended by anybody in public and private communities
- is commercially restricted by its authors
Let's say I had a few microservices in different repositories and they communicated over HTTP using JSON. Some services are triggered directly by other microservices, but others can be triggered by events like a timer going off, a file being dropped into a bucket, a firewall rule blocking X amount of packets and hitting a threshold, etc.
Is there a way to document the microservices together in one holistic view? Maybe, how do you visualise the data, its schema (fields, types, ...), and its flow between the microservices?
-------
Bonus (optional) question: Is there a way to handle schema updates? For example generate code from the documentation that triggers a CI build in affected repos to ensure it still works with the updates.
April 23 (Reuters) - International Business Machines (IBM.N), opens new tab is nearing a deal to buy cloud software provider HashiCorp (HCP.O) , opens new tab, according to a person familiar with the matter. Hashicorp's stock surged 24%, giving it a market value of $6.1 billion, after the Wall Street Journal first reported the talks.
movie-web was just taken down with all its repos, Yuzu was taken down, then suyu forked it on gitlab and was taken down, countless clones of nintendo games, platform emulators, and a bunch of other things are taken down because they are hosted on the clear web.
If you're a dev and planning to write software for piracy, host it on I2P!
So, I watched The Higgs Field, explained - Don Lincoln and there it explains that particles are massless and it is only through their interaction with the Higg's field that they gain mass. However, how are they "moving" through the Higg's field? Is it through a movement in the 3rd dimension or a dimension above?
And related, does the movement through the Higg's field generate gravitons that affect particles they interact with by "pulling" them in the opposite direction of which they were traveling?
The wikipedia articles are terribly written (for math loves or people who just need to refresh their knowledge).
What is a "sum" of types? What is a product of types? Is it possible to Cat x Dog or Cat + Dog? What does that even mean?
A federal watchdog group's dareport exposes major flaws in Microsoft's cloud cybersecurity, demanding urgent action from CEO Satya Nadella to address widespread shortcomings and restore customer trust amidst escalating cyber threats.
We test the Linux-first, all-AMD Sirius 16 laptop, discuss the new Hyprland release, and share a few stories from our recent trip.
> We test the Linux-first, all-AMD Sirius 16 laptop, discuss the new Hyprland release, and share a few stories from our recent trip.
Imagine performing a sweep around an object with your smartphone and getting a realistic, fully editable 3D model that you can view from any angle. This is fast becoming reality, thanks to advances in AI.
Imagine performing a sweep around an object with your smartphone and getting a realistic, fully editable 3D model that you can view from any angle. This is fast becoming reality, thanks to advances in AI.