semiquaver
Brilliant semantics? No one said anything normative. You’re arguing with yourself on your own non-sequitur. SQL is SQL. It’s extremely flawed but who freaking cares, that’s why ParticleDB shouldn’t have tried to implement SQL let alone full postgres compatibility when they clearly are not equipped to do so! Your comments about how strange and non-intuitive SQL are true but irrelevant.
> does not lead to high quality software.
> WHERE column = NULL and then query WHERE column <> NULL
WHERE column IS NULL and then query WHERE column IS NOT NULL
$180K in CA for someone who reports directly to the head of engineering is not even top of market for Topeka, KS.
(Edit for clarity: this is quoted from the linked article)
You could write predicates over non-existent columns:
root=> SELECT * FROM t
WHERE definitely_not_a_column = 4;
a | b
---+----
4 | 5
(1 row)
Or ask if 4 = 5
root=> SELECT * FROM t WHERE 4 = 5;
a | b
---+----
5 | 6
(1 row)
It must have been darkly amusing to see all these defect tickets coming in, only for them to frantically shovel each one to increasingly overworked LLM agents to apply pig-lipstick while the humans in charge oh-so-slowly start to realize their software quality is not quite what their glazing agents had been telling them and that what they have on their hands is basically sub-mongo-quality slop. What a world we live in, huh?
> technically such a model should abide by the licence of the inputs, hence all models would probably be GPL
That question is a category error because machine learning weights are not copyrightable at all, being mere lists of numbers and facts, the result of a statistical process and not a human creative hand, very much ineligible for copyright protection. They would be protected by trade secret law only, like the coke recipe.
So the GPL, which operates entirely within the domain of copyright law, cannot possibly virally spread from a licensed source code file to a machine learning model which trained on it. That would be a cross species jump. Certainly there could be other legal consequences but in no universe is someone going to jump out and yell gotcha and force OpenAI to personally hand deliver the newly GPLed weights for their frontier model to RMS.
> I think technically such a model should abide by the licence of the inputs
> If you're downloading it for commercial purposes (clearly the case) you're violating the license.
Legally speaking, it is extremely well established that downloading is not the type of copying that “copyright” concerns itself with. And the GPL and similar licenses are predicated on copyright laws.
Once you make the content available in some other way, then copyright law might have something to say.
People in tech used to make fun of “you wouldn’t download a car”. It’s sad that so many have reversed their principles the moment a convenient villain shows up.
Let me refer you to my earlier distinction between things that have happened and things you fear.
Fear that something will happen is not the same thing as evidence it has happened.
Let me tell you, at the business I work at, some of our customers work at a company that uses a commercial VDI service for all workstations couldn’t access our service because the VDI egress was in GCP and we had an AWS WAF rule banning datacenter IPs.
Obviously, we removed the rule because it was doing nothing useful but plenty of harm. Real bots come from residential IPs.
To be clear here, the accusation is that the Chinese communist party or Alibaba itself intentionally engineered malicious secret loyalties into Qwen3.8-Flash-Next and made sure that evidence of them stays out of CoT. To compare that with “ordinary” stochastic model quality issues is bizarre and shocking. No idea if this accusation Is true, but if it is, this is an absolutely watershed moment.
Receiving investments from people affiliated with the GOP doesn’t seem itself that bad, unless you are so partisan that you yourself are infected with exactly the thing the site aims to combat. Left wing bias is also toxic in certain media sources and should be avoided unless you don’t actually care about bias and are more interested in an agenda.