I remember an engineer tasked to redesign a piece for a military jet. It was a piece used to refuel the jet while in flight.
Apparently on jet had to perform an emergency landing as they went out of fuel. The injector and the hole were designed by two different teams, one in the US and one in Europe.
Apparently nobody told the Europeans that measurements were in inches...
Thank you, you reassured me quite a bit. I'll have a good read of the manual.
It is not really a build server, it's a compute server. I'll have users installing hundreds of different software packages, most of them using incompatible libraries and thus I was thinking of using Nix.
Alternatives would be LMOD, which however requires the administrator to install very single piece of software, which... We don't really have a dedicated system administrator and I don't really want to go through the compilation instructions of every single piece of software we use. Alternatively everyone could compile their own software or install it through something like conda, but that eats up a lot of storage space since every library would be duplicated across users.
Hello, thank you for the in depth explanation! I am not very familiar with nix, and yes I'm talking about the package manager.
I have installed NixOs recently to toy around with it and see whether it could be a good solution to certain problems we have. I have determined that NixOs itself is not mature enough for what we need, but I do see value in the nix package manager that other solutions do not offer.
Regarding the 4 points you raise
I'm not too worried about hash squatting, I guess there's no way around it, but other ways of managing packages have way worse flaws than that.
I do want my users to be able to build packages. In most cases I imagine we'll use pre built packages, but often packages available are not optimized for certain architectures.
How does the nix sandbox work? Just so I know what I'm working with. Do you know where I can read about it?
Does root actively run installed packages at any point? If that is the case I'd be a bit wary to use nix for this purpose.
Thank you for the clear explanation. This is good enough for me I guess then. What I am most afraid is not really a colleague building a malicious package on purpose, but rather them installing something which is then run as root and gets access to the whole system.
I understand packages are built by unprivileged users, but in the end they are owned by root.
What I wonder is whether in the way it is possible that something is run as root without someone specifically deciding it should be.
I mostly run Debian on servers. I do not want a rolling release on a server, at all.
I don't care how well they check their packages, I just want the thing to work. I do not care about new features, I just want it to work.
What I wonder is wheter this could lead to root executing untrusted code. I will have several users installing packages and I can not trust that they will check every package. Thus I'd like to know whether I can trust the system to be resilient without careful attention.
Fair, I'm always scared to upgrade to a new Debian release and the process is always painful. But that happens every couple years and I can take a week or two to look into it before doing it.
Every time I did pacman -Syu it was a Russian roulette. Most of the times everything was fine, but often enough there was a problem and something was broken and I had to spend a couple days figuring out what was the problem.
You need an API key to use the app... I doubt the people who need it will ever use it.
Besides, is this needed? Do people not know which areas of their town are in shade?
TBF, I remember working for a company producing a domotic system. They had this way to program it, which involved a button and nothing else, no leds, no buzzers, just one button.
Do you want to enable this specific functionality? Press the button 63 times, make sure you don't lose the count or you'll enable something else.
Actually, what I have seen all over the places is people reviewing my manuscripts by passing them to chatgpt and sending revision requests without even reading the article.
It happened to me being asked to do a major review because I was not describing enough in detail how I trained LLM models in my research; my research was not about LLMs and never mentioned LLMs anywhere.
I tend to distrust studies entirely based on models. Modelling is good, but you should use it together with some substantive experimental data.
When LLMs help researchers quickly identify the best projects, as in some technical fields, researchers will become more discriminating about which projects they develop. On the other hand, if LLMs mostly accelerate writing and analysis, as in fieldwork-based disciplines, the fraction of investigations that are published may increase.
Ok, do we have any evidence of which of the two phenomena is actually happening at the moment?
Research has always been full of people publishing a lot of trash. If anything this should lead to changing the incentives for researchers, such as not evaluating them on the publication count. Not really on demonizing LLM use in a research setting.
I reckon that is a problem. A fair solution would be to popularize housing occupation again, that way the risk of not renting the houses I much higher for landlords.
People are very worried about squatters, in my opinion there's way too little squatters. Where I live there's not enough housing, yet you walk around and see entire streets of buildings in which nobody lives.
The state department said the discussions at the conference were “substantive and constructive” despite the map
I can imagine how substantive and constructive you can be, when you discuss about politics, problems and collaborations with countries you don't even know where they are...
I remember an engineer tasked to redesign a piece for a military jet. It was a piece used to refuel the jet while in flight.
Apparently on jet had to perform an emergency landing as they went out of fuel. The injector and the hole were designed by two different teams, one in the US and one in Europe. Apparently nobody told the Europeans that measurements were in inches...
Oh, thanks! Didn't know that
I guess depending on your interpretation of without it could either be "cat" or "a".
Fair, but in general I find it way more useful to use cat for piping.
In most cases I'll do something like
This gets more complicated if the file is at the end of the command.
Good luck finding a 25 years old EV.
Thank you, you reassured me quite a bit. I'll have a good read of the manual.
It is not really a build server, it's a compute server. I'll have users installing hundreds of different software packages, most of them using incompatible libraries and thus I was thinking of using Nix. Alternatives would be LMOD, which however requires the administrator to install very single piece of software, which... We don't really have a dedicated system administrator and I don't really want to go through the compilation instructions of every single piece of software we use. Alternatively everyone could compile their own software or install it through something like conda, but that eats up a lot of storage space since every library would be duplicated across users.
Hello, thank you for the in depth explanation! I am not very familiar with nix, and yes I'm talking about the package manager. I have installed NixOs recently to toy around with it and see whether it could be a good solution to certain problems we have. I have determined that NixOs itself is not mature enough for what we need, but I do see value in the nix package manager that other solutions do not offer.
Regarding the 4 points you raise
Thank you for the clear explanation. This is good enough for me I guess then. What I am most afraid is not really a colleague building a malicious package on purpose, but rather them installing something which is then run as root and gets access to the whole system. I understand packages are built by unprivileged users, but in the end they are owned by root.
What I wonder is whether in the way it is possible that something is run as root without someone specifically deciding it should be.
I mostly run Debian on servers. I do not want a rolling release on a server, at all. I don't care how well they check their packages, I just want the thing to work. I do not care about new features, I just want it to work.
Thank you for the explanation. Yes, I'm talking about the nix package manager, not about the operating system.
As far as I understand packages are built by less privileges users, but libraries and binaries are owned by the root user in the nix store.
https://nix.dev/manual/nix/2.34/installation/multi-user.html
What I wonder is wheter this could lead to root executing untrusted code. I will have several users installing packages and I can not trust that they will check every package. Thus I'd like to know whether I can trust the system to be resilient without careful attention.
Fair, I'm always scared to upgrade to a new Debian release and the process is always painful. But that happens every couple years and I can take a week or two to look into it before doing it.
Every time I did pacman -Syu it was a Russian roulette. Most of the times everything was fine, but often enough there was a problem and something was broken and I had to spend a couple days figuring out what was the problem.
You need an API key to use the app... I doubt the people who need it will ever use it. Besides, is this needed? Do people not know which areas of their town are in shade?
Any mathematician here who reviewed the correctness and relevance of these proofs?
TBF, I remember working for a company producing a domotic system. They had this way to program it, which involved a button and nothing else, no leds, no buzzers, just one button.
Do you want to enable this specific functionality? Press the button 63 times, make sure you don't lose the count or you'll enable something else.
Actually, what I have seen all over the places is people reviewing my manuscripts by passing them to chatgpt and sending revision requests without even reading the article.
It happened to me being asked to do a major review because I was not describing enough in detail how I trained LLM models in my research; my research was not about LLMs and never mentioned LLMs anywhere.
I tend to distrust studies entirely based on models. Modelling is good, but you should use it together with some substantive experimental data.
Ok, do we have any evidence of which of the two phenomena is actually happening at the moment?
Research has always been full of people publishing a lot of trash. If anything this should lead to changing the incentives for researchers, such as not evaluating them on the publication count. Not really on demonizing LLM use in a research setting.
I reckon that is a problem. A fair solution would be to popularize housing occupation again, that way the risk of not renting the houses I much higher for landlords.
People are very worried about squatters, in my opinion there's way too little squatters. Where I live there's not enough housing, yet you walk around and see entire streets of buildings in which nobody lives.
I can imagine how substantive and constructive you can be, when you discuss about politics, problems and collaborations with countries you don't even know where they are...
Does that make it approximately 2,000 migrants?
Ceuta is part of Spanish kingdoms since way before Morocco ever existed.