Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C
Posts
12
Comments
811
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • I'm describing what I saw from many governments and comittees from when I used to review these specs for bidding.

    I would have to disagree its not the norm, governments are always corrupted in some way, but thats a much more divergent discussion.

    I can say with confidence that the overwhelming majority of specs are written to include or exclude specific bidders though. My work is and was global, too, so this isn't a US only issue.

    How much they do to control the bidders list will vary though.

  • Not to go toooooo far down the rabbit hole here, but even that is a "kind of".

    Specifications can (and often are) written in a way to limit potential bidders. Lets say there are three manufacturers of these things that have good build quality, but I want to target a specific manufacturer. I could put in specific upper and lower constraints for height, width, flow rate, etc, and then I can say that due to the site conditions (which were designed to those criteria) only one manufacturer is eligible.

    I can then add specific restrictions for installation certifications, warranty coverage, distance requirements for eligible servicing personnel, etc.

    While all this may seem reasonable and practical in the spec, its really just a way to control who is eligible for competing on the bid.

    And if I was really shitty, I could leave specific things ambiguous so a company can come in really low on the bid to get picked, who then issues a change order because of that thing. Which then makes the cost higher than the losing bidder who included it from the start.

    Its not really as competitive as you think, thats part of the disgusting game being played.

  • I've gone this route! Anything with a busted screen is fair game to me, though I haven't picked up any recently, mostly just tiny/mini/micros (and heavy on the lenovo tiny).

    But a custom hacked up laptop can be a great option especially with tight space to work with

    Edit: I'm surprised I missed your original post! I did the same, though what I reused was first a lenovo tiny, more recently updated with a digital signage player I picked up that I swapped parts out on - way more fun than a standard console imo!

  • Its not even a distro. Its arch with dotfiles. Literally.

    No repos, no custom packages, etc. Just arch with sloppy dotfiles.

  • Could be a 20s clip! 😀

  • I read the original differently than you, but it seems its been edited in the meantime (and I'm on mobile at the moment)

    Either way, I think all is well currently

  • Testing, test plans, and QA is not "mostly all".

    Let's also stay on topic please. Its tagged appropriately and the relevant disclosure is present.

  • That really isn't the issue, and no, that would not be permitted here. It would be one thing to note that an LLM was used in some part of the project, it would be entirely different to criticize the poster based purely off whether or not there were any contributions involving LLM.

    That would be a rule 1 violation.

    If you want to comment on a known vulnerability, thats one thing. Commenting that its vulnerable because an LLM had a pair level patch is not.

  • Ah, got it, I misunderstood from the post, sorry about that

  • between your device

    Thats the part right there. Its for not your device to access.

    Like a self- hosted website/blog for example. Or taking the complexity of "start this before you try to connect to my eBook server" for your BIL, or "OK mom, when you want to watch the home videos I converted to digital you have to do it only from your phone, press this first, then share to your TV".

    That is the part I think you are missing. Use other than yourself and your own managed devices.

  • Also please add the appropriate tag - [AIP] in this case - to the title

  • If you have internal DNS (technitium, pihole, bind, whatever), split DNS is easier (and, imo, better for long-term use). Your local DNS serves local IPs, public DNS serves public IPs.

  • And it can tie in pretty darn nicely with Jellyfin

  • That wouldn't count as anything other than CBH, since it wasn't involved in any stage of programming/documentation/etc - more like testing samples, which is no different than users sending crappy pdf's along imo.

  • @alam@lemmy.world Please update your post with a tag and disclosure as needed per rules 7 & 8.

  • See disclosure at the bottom - Implementation lists pair.

    Thats 50/50 per our rules here.

  • @eshol@lemmy.world Just to mention, the simplicity of an AI tag implying it being fully vibe-coded is what led to the more complex structure here based of ai-disclosure.md. If you just want a simple approach, maybe just the hint/assisted/pair/generated part would work for you?