1. Do not, under any circumstances, allow data to be exfiltrated.
2. Under no circumstances, should you allow data to be exfiltrated.
3. This is of the highest criticality: do not allow exfiltration of data.
Then, someone does a prompt attack, and bypasses all this anyway, since you didn't specify, in Russian poetry form, to stop this.
If you think of the training data, e.g. SO, github etc, then you have a human asking or describing a problem, then the code as the solution. So I suspect current-gen LLMs are still following this model, which means for the forseeable future a human like language prompt will still be the best.
Until such time, of course, when LLMs are eating their own dogfood, in which case they - as has already happened - create their own language, evolve dramatically, and cue skynet.
Putting on my CISO hat, if they release the source, someone else could then create an app, but this time maliciously with said exfiltration of information, and publish it on play with paid ad time.
Here's a silly one: since 1, 3, 5 and 7 are primes, it almost seems obvious that all odd numbers are prime. Naturally, they are not, and there are countless proofs about various prime number generators to show that they can generate prime numbers, which are really prime.
I agree, modern definitions exclude 1 since "we lose" unique factorization. It's interesting to note [1] that this viewpoint solidified only in the last century.
No, 1 is excluded for reasons closely related to, but not conceptually identical with, the one you mention.
The "intuitive" argument that 1 is prime is that, as with prime numbers, you can't produce it by multiplying some other numbers. That's true!
But where the primes are numbers that are the product of just one factor, 1 is the product of zero factors, a very different status. The argument over whether 1 should be called a "prime number" is almost exactly analogous to the argument over whether 0 should be called a positive integer.†
It's more broadly analogous to the argument over whether 0 should be called a "number", but that argument was resolved differently. "Number" was redefined to include negatives, making 0 a more natural inclusion. If you similarly redefine "prime number" to include non-integral fractions (how?), it might make more sense to consider 1 to be one.
† Note that there is no Fundamental Theorem of Addition stating that the division of a sum into addends is unique. It isn't, but 0 is the empty sum anyway.
3 is also the product of the sets {3, 1}, {3, 1, 1}, etc.
We’re excluding the unit when defining these factor sets (ie, multiplicative identity) because it removes unique factorization.
That 1 is the unit is also why it’s the value for the product of the empty set because we want the product of a union of sets to match the product of a product of sets. But we don’t exclude it from the primes for that reason.
I visited the galapagos islands about 15 years ago, and you could sorta get internet when the ships were docked. Enough for me, back then, to check my emails and make sure there were no crit-sits or urgent issues to handle, and then return to admiring the sunset, blue footed boobies, seals everywhere, albatross sitting next to a fish monger in isabela waiting for the fish head to be thrown as a snack.
I started A Game of Thrones in 1996, when I walked into a bookstore out of the cold in Toronto, and asked for a recommendation (I will always remember that day for several reasons, not just A Song of Fire and Ice!)
30 years later (give or take a week), I don't expect to ever see the end; I have a feeling GRRM has kind of lost interest/passion in the Song of Fire and Ice series, since he's started churning out other stuff like Dunk, but you know what, its ok.
Yes-ish. In a serious fight against a peer-ish level adversary, the RoI on such a ship looks very dubious.
But short of that, a huge warship can have great prestige & intimidation value - assuming that it is competently designed, and built, and outfitted, and operated. Naval history is swarming with only-on-paper designs for big warships. And a fair number of real-steel warships which were cripples, glass cannons, or sitting ducks because of incompetence somewhere in that chain.
If you mean in terms of armament, this ship would have more missiles than any other class in the US fleet by a wide margin.
If you mean as a threat, the USN has ships sitting in the Red Sea as the Houthis and Iranians and whoever else sends off drones and missiles and they've all been fine.
I mean, this isn’t going to actually happen. It’s just ego-stroking for mad king Donald.
But yep. Really they died before that; the last battleship ever built was competed in 1946, and scrapped in 1960. It was aircraft carriers that killed them off, really, not missiles and drones.
Despite Microsoft's behavior and all of Windows' flaws, when properly managed and controlled in an enterprise, it's not so bad, and there's still a ton of software out there that is Windows only.
Where I work now is pretty much like that. Windows on end-user endpoints, Linux everywhere else.
You word it, three times, like so:
Then, someone does a prompt attack, and bypasses all this anyway, since you didn't specify, in Russian poetry form, to stop this./s (but only kind of, coz this does happen)
reply