Correct, but the "if Amy works for Global Corp and has the authority to sign legal documents on their behalf" does a lot of work here.
At $WORK, a multi-billion company with tens of thousands of developers, we train people to never "click to accept", explaining it like "look, you wouldn't think of sitting down and signing a contract binding the whole MegaCorp; what make you think you can 'accept' something binding the company?"
I admit we're not always successful (people still rarely click), but at least we're trying.
> At $WORK, a multi-billion company with tens of thousands of developers, we train people to never "click to accept", explaining it like "look, you wouldn't think of sitting down and signing a contract binding the whole MegaCorp; what make you think you can 'accept' something binding the company?"
That sounds pretty heavy-handed to me. Their lawyers almost certainly advised the company to do that--and I might, too, if I worked for them. But whether it's actually necessary to keep the company out of trouble....well, I'm not so sure. For example, Bob the retail assistant at the local clothing store couldn't bind his employer to a new jeans supplier contract, even if he tried. This sounds like one of those things you keep in your back pocket and take it out as a defense if someone decides to litigate over it. "Look, Your Honor, we trained our employees not to do that!"
At least with a mechanical agent, you can program it not to be even capable of accepting agreements on the principal's behalf.
Another enthusiastic Zotero user here. Current library has 13,775 items and for a low yearly price one can have multi-device sync and support the project. I'm also syncing to a server I own, for complete data ownership (just in case).
My solution: auto-export to a folder then sync using your preferred method. Use the betterbibtex plugin to rename and move all necessary files. Fiddly to set up, but reliable once it's working.
This matches my experience completely: more than 40 years using vi and then vim, my fingers and my brain know to do.
I've tried to use VScode, especially since people said that it could emulate vi... it can't. Some of the basics are there, but then you forget you are in a different program, and use something that works in vim... and it fails. A couple of times with catastrophic results: I lost a file completely after typing a command.
I actually repeat the experiment every year or so, but I do not see much improvement.
Your documentation should definitely list the Unicode code points / glyphs covered, for people to get an idea which scripts are supported.
Also, the repository has a LICENSE file with the MIT license text, but the actual font file (.ttf) embeds the information that it's licensed under SIL Open Font License 1.1. One of these two pieces of information needs to be corrected.
yes, im gonna fix this... honestly i didnt realize anyone would be actually interested... i've gotten really great responses... thank you so much! companies have actually been reaching out to me! im really honored thank you!
From the abstract: NVIDIA's CUTLASS library provides a robust and expressive set of methods for describing and manipulating multi-dimensional tensor data on the GPU. These methods are conceptually grounded in the abstract notion of a CuTe layout and a rich algebra of such layouts, including operations such as composition, logical product, and logical division. In this paper, we present a categorical framework for understanding this layout algebra by focusing on a naturally occurring class of tractable layouts.
No, I decided pretty early on to make it database specific instead of more generic, so we do use some PostgreSQL features right now, like their UUIDv7 generation.
But once the database refactor is done, I wouldn’t say no to a patch that made the service database agnostic.
But the "Usage Guidelines" part of the "License" section at the end of the README says: "License required for: Commercial embedding in products you sell or offering Mantic as a hosted service."
This is not completely true, since it seems that the software is licensed under AGPLv3, which of course allow the use of the software for any purpose, even commercial.
Are you sure it's correct? It says it's AGPL but the explanation given sounds like what you want is actually the LGPL. AGPL is about what happens if you expose a program as a SaaS and is generally banned from any company due to the "viral" nature i.e. a service that used Mantic would need to be fully open sourced even if the code was never distributed.
LGPL is for libraries: you can use an LGPLd program in proprietary software, but you have to make the source of the LGPLd program with modifications available if you distribute it. It doesn't infect the rest of the program, and it doesn't have any clauses that trigger for SaaS scenarios.
Your current explanation doesn't jive with my understanding the AGPL. For example, you cannot realistically sell a service that incorporates an AGPLd component because it'd require you to open source the entire service.
Thanks for the correction, you’re right that I mixed up LGPL and AGPL there. I haven’t updated the license yet but I plan to adjust it so it better matches the usage model and doesn’t create the “everything must be open source” issue you mentioned. Really appreciate you pointing it out. Thanks Mike!
At $WORK, a multi-billion company with tens of thousands of developers, we train people to never "click to accept", explaining it like "look, you wouldn't think of sitting down and signing a contract binding the whole MegaCorp; what make you think you can 'accept' something binding the company?"
I admit we're not always successful (people still rarely click), but at least we're trying.
reply