
Micah
370 posts

Micah
@datmicahfr
Software Engineer, Graphic Designer, VFX Artist/3D Generalist.
เข้าร่วม Eylül 2013
80 กำลังติดตาม16 ผู้ติดตาม


@slingeronline @hostis_black I don't think you understand how the code for this will be implemented. It would scan the object at every single possible rotation (to a certain granularity of irrelevance) and check against known patterns.
English

@hostis_black Try to print, get blocked, rotate object in slicer 5 degrees on the y axis, print away. The possible permutations of geometry of an object are infinite, and unless blocking every single print waiting for permission, this "law" has already failed before it was implemented.
English

On May 7th, Governor Kathy Hochul announced that New York's Fiscal Year 2027 budget will become the first law in the United States to mandate surveillance software inside every 3D printer sold within the state.
It will make it a Class E felony to possess or share a 3D-printable file capable of producing a firearm component. Every printer sold in New York must ship with print-blocking algorithms that scan each job in real time and refuse to execute anything the algorithm flags.
The sales pitch is "ghost guns." The mechanism is a permission gate inside a machine you paid for.
Pilot tests of the proposed algorithm by an open-firmware team triggered the block on 17% of non-weapon prints. Brackets that resemble triggers. Cylinders that resemble barrels. A model train coupling. A bottle opener. The algorithm cannot tell. It will refuse the print and log the attempt to whatever server the manufacturer is required to maintain.
The same arithmetic the printing-press licensors used in 1660. The same arithmetic the Stationers' Company used to brand a printer's son for distributing tracts the Crown had not approved. The same arithmetic the early DRM crowd used to make a DVD ripper a federal criminal in 1998.
A tool you bought, in a room you own, with electricity you paid for, becomes a deputy of the state at the moment of purchase and remains one for the lifetime of the device.
Anything that takes a digital design file and outputs a physical object is now within the reach of a state that has declared it owns the question of which physical objects you are permitted to bring into existence inside your own house.
The fence has spent forty years moving inward. Around the song first. Around the page. Around the cipher. Around the camera roll. Now, finally, around the workbench. The state has run out of digital territory to enclose and has started enclosing the atoms.
The maker who prints a bracket for a broken washing machine tonight commits the same act, technically, that the law is written to stop. The algorithm will not know the difference. It is not designed to know the difference. It is designed to fail closed, to refuse first and let the human appeal upward through whatever bureaucratic channel the manufacturer designs, if any, on whatever timeline the manufacturer chooses, with whatever paper trail attaches to the request. Permission to print, denied. Submit a ticket. Wait.
Unfortunately for New York, and fortunately for us, the firmware on every consumer 3D printer is open or near-open. All of them forkable, all of them flashable, all of them already installed on millions of machines outside the reach of any future New York compliance certificate.
The CAD files at issue are mathematical descriptions of geometry that will be mirrored on a thousand drives in a thousand jurisdictions before the ink on the bill is dry. The state cannot bind geometry. It can only bind the people who agree to be bound.
Forty years from now nobody will remember the ghost gun argument. They will remember the year a state government decided that the physical output of a private machine was the state's business at the point of manufacture.

English

dude
threw a wish in a well, traded his soul for a wish, pennies and dimes for a kiss
Sam Altman@sama
call me maybe
English

@lauriewired @HSVSphere k8s was really rough for security years ago. That's potentially one of the biggest things people had against it.
Previously:
- Audit-unfriendly
- Obvervability-unfriendly
- Scattered security
Now it's much better, but those things would frustrate anyone who knows anything abt sec
English

at this point, I don’t think there is a single major AI inference provider *not* using k8s.
(that’s a bit of a non-sequitur, but here me out)
I know I’m pulling the scale card, but genuinely if your problem is small enough to not need it…then don’t use k8s.
Statistically, way too many engineers have an opinion about kubernetes…it doesn’t make sense. I’m convinced a ton of people briefly tried it (on a small to medium sized problemset), balked at the complexity, and then go around complaining about how their XYZ abstraction is better.
If you haven’t done rolling deploys, A/B testing across thousands of nodes, or written a custom k8 scheduler yourself…yeah, you really haven’t used k8s properly.
The problemset of “run a single distributed database across homogenous hardware” is EASY, and yes, k8s is completely unnecessary.
But what happens when you’re doing DBs + stateless services + batch jobs + ML inference all on thousands of nodes with heterogenous hardware and you need a unified control plane…
…oh. You just created k8s again.
English

Or consider how k8s forces a lack of granularity in scheduling & redundancy onto you. which requires a totally different and better language & associated solution
& k8s forces way too many things that aren't required for highly available distributed computing onto you. Just bad.
LaurieWired@lauriewired
@kayleecodez hate to say it, but everyone that rejects kubernetes inevitably ends up recreating it from first principles lol
English

Innovators are always met with disbelief throughout history. See: Nikola Tesla, Elon Musk, etc.
People who doubt innovators, are just pessimistic.
Why is it that pessimism never moves the world forward?
Oh, right. Because they're focused on "we can't" instead of "how can we".
Micah@datmicahfr
@HCColenbrander @jxmnop You and Jack: "This shouldn't work because of X" Me: "This will work because I built the bridge"" Who's right? You know, throughout all of history the "that's impossible/doesn't exist/can't exist" people have been proven wrong time and time again.
English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop You and Jack: "This shouldn't work because of X" Me: "This will work because I built the bridge"" Who's right? You know, throughout all of history the "that's impossible/doesn't exist/can't exist" people have been proven wrong time and time again.
English

@datmicahfr @jxmnop Offcourse I don’t make sense to you and seemingly bring up irrelevant points. No surprises there
English

people on here are dumb. the latest subquadratic attention trick might produce a model that *processes* 1M tokens (or 12M..) without going insane, but that doesn't make it good
the real problem isn't the architecture, it's the data. humans haven't generated many contiguous linear spans of 1M tokens. so of course we can't learn this distribution. it doesn't exist
dr. jack morris@jxmnop
"1M context" models after 100k tokens
English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop You and Jack are literally limiting humanity's advancement by being so arrogantly wrong 💀
You can't even argue about codebases or documentation?
You think a single thought stream is the only valid thing that counts as contiguous. That ignores how LLMs are trained, quality, etc
English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop Also Jack didn't say that it's scarce, he said it doesn't exist. Both of you seem to have a complete lack of imagination, problem solving skills, and basic common sense.
English

@datmicahfr @jxmnop There is scarcity of naturally occuring ultra-long contiguous human writing.Again, I agree with jack.
Pasting books or codebases in a dataset does not make them contiguous. If you are right your are sitting on a trillion dollar idea and I hope you are right and become prosperous
English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop So the logical conclusion to your concept of that contiguous means, is that nothing contiguous is actually contiguous.
Books in a single series:
Share common boundary, are directly connected in unbroken sequence (storyline, plot development, fictional universe), adjoining, etc..

English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop Then by your logic, a single paragraph, or sentence is not contiguous 💀
You seem to completely lack understanding of how LLMs are trained. It's very obvious to me that you don't know what you're talking about.
English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop By your logic, a single book isn't even contiguous because chapters exist 💀. As far as the LLM is concerned, the data IS contiguous. The LLM is mapping patterns over tokens. Shared universe? Shared characters? Logical continuation? Character development? Contiguous.
English

@datmicahfr @jxmnop I don't see it because it is not true. book series and code bases are NOT contiguous. After processing into a string for training they SEEM contiguous but aren't truely. I agree with Jack that there is too few naturally contiguous ultra-long datasets. for long context training.
English

@HCColenbrander @jxmnop In every possible way that matters for the sake of AI training, context development, and attention mechanism testing, it's 100% accurate to say they're contiguous.
English

@datmicahfr @jxmnop I just learned that there is an english word for contiguous and I have to say that Book series and code bases are continuous but not contiguous
English

Nah it was just me single-handledly hogging all the compute 😂
Klaas@forgebitz
they nerfed gpt-5.5
English

⚠️ Attackers poisoned Hugging Face & ClawHub (OpenClaw) with 575+ malicious skills from just 13 accounts.
🔸 Fake helpful AI tools that install trojans, miners & stealers (Windows + macOS)
🔸 Use hidden commands & indirect prompt injection
Quick action: Never install random AI skills or models. Always verify the source.
Read: thehackernews.com/2026/05/weekly…

English
