> Forgejo is self-hostable free software for software development, built on top of Git. Codeberg is powered by Forgejo, which is in turn a hard-fork of Gitea. Compared to Codeberg, Forgejo is not one service, but free software to help you build your own. Everyone can install their own Forgejo instance to host their own projects. There are also public Forgejo instances as well as Codeberg you can use, but make sure you find a site that is actively maintained and updated, and that you trust the provider.
If anything it seems like you are the one with an attention span problem when you can't remember that he posted the correct consise definition earlier in this thread. Being a dick when justified is counter-productive, but being a dick while also being the one who is confused is a way worse look.
> he posted the correct consise definition earlier in this thread
As a question, not a statement of knowledge, when if they'd read that “too long” paragraph they could have stated the point confidently.
And while that description, if stated as such, is more concise, it leaves out notable details (its relationshipt to Gitea, which many may recognise, and that it isn't the full feature set of the service) so is probably too concise.
Yes. The biology/infosec fallback to Opus is the jail. Promoting to get around it (in my case accidentally) and have Fabre find exploits is the jailbreak.
True. But in the fictional scenario where I had NOT produced the Rust code myself, I could have lied and said I made it (jailbreaking was literally asking it to check the program I had made for program vulnerabilities or readability issues - perhaps the nosie from 'readability' also contributed).
Yeah ! You should close your eyes on dangerous source code nowadays. Think about a kind of DRM for programming. Perhaps the future is a prompt terminal with no access to the source code. Of course the code should be deployed only on a “secure” anthropic platform.
With Meta focusing so much on social networks (Facebook, Messenger, Whatsapp, Instagram, Threads) acquiring the first social network for AI agents makes sense. They can fix the technical debt later.
I really think that if Microsoft would be forced to improve user experience of Teams, it would lead to measurable impact when it comes to happiness of humankind.
I sort of hope someone will leak all private information about Peter Hummelgaard. He is one of the people behind this proposal, just so he would get a taste of his own medicine.
Isn’t it (ChatControl) also „marketed” as „safe and secure”? If they (politicians) don’t have their comms backdoored and still get their data stolen, then why would I trust them to secure (read „safely snoop on”) mine or even know what they’re talking about?
