But it's still a bit more difficult to sue them for leaking your company's data.

At least for now.

You can write unambiguous (UB-free) code and the compiler's output will be deterministic. There will even be a spec that explains how your source maps to your program's behavior. LLM has neither.

Also, if you need to control performance, you still need to know how CPU cache and branch prediction works, both of which exists at the abstraction level of assembly.

How can you read a language you didn't learn?

PatchGuard would like to have a word with you.

Ironic, since Unix is itself an embodiment of "worse is better."

I used floating timestamps as some kind of an identity. If there is ever a conflict, I just increase it by 1 ulp until it doesn't collide with anything. Sorry.

In Python, `shlex` has utilities for quoting and tokenizing strings for POSIX shells.

> Documentation: https://docs.python.org/3/library/shlex.html

(Windows users: CMD is hopeless. Sorry. Try powershell.)

Finally, a DOOM download that bypasses captive portals

> There are better techniques for hyper-parameter optimisation, right?

There always are. You need to think about what those would be, though. Autoresearch outsources the thinking to LLMs.

This is exactly what subinterpreters are for! Basically isolated copies of Python in the same process.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/concurrent.interpreters.ht...

If you want a higher-level interface, there is InterpreterPoolExecutor:

https://docs.python.org/3/library/concurrent.futures.html#co...