Clay_pidgin

Once an anomaly is defined, I usually find it easier to build a regular alert for it. I guess the ML or LLM would be most useful to me in finding problems that I wasn’t looking for.

Our devs are implementing some ML for anomaly detection, which seems promising.

There’s also a LLM with MCP etc that is writing the pull requests and some documentation at least, so I guess our devs like it. The customers LOVE it, but it keeps making shit up and they don’t mind. Stuff like “make a graph of usage on weekdays” and it includes 6 days some weeks. They generated a monthly report for themselves, and it made up every scrap of data, and the customer missed the little note at the bottom where the damn thing said “I can regenerate this report with actual data if it is made available to me”.

Is it actually any good? I don’t really play horror, but it mostly just looks odd in the trailer.

Doesn’t seem like it would NEED to be updated, except to stay working on current Android versions, no?

Oh man, I think we could be friends.

I have most of Dark Age on my shelf but I’ve barely read it.

That’s bananas. So the only choice is to get a later provincial government to revoke whatever rule they passed using it?

Hi. I’ve never watched hockey.

Is there a mechanism to override a province’s use of the clause? Also, does the federal government also have the option to invoke it?

Well, you sound like a catch!

#SeenfromLemmy

#WhoNeedsHashtags

That sounds like a job for AI, I think. I’m hopeful that you can find a good solution!

The streaming apps aren’t as convincing to replace unless you’re pirating, I suppose. I don’t want to rip all of my DVDs, and I don’t have that many anyway.

I could imagine. Thank you!

I think I’m sold, thank you!

You make this game seem really appealing! Is it much better in a group, do you think?

Cross stitch looks like fun, but I don’t want any cross stitched stuff afterwards, I guess.

That sounds awful. Thank you for the example.

Non Canadian here from /all. I’ve seen the notwithstanding clause mentioned, but this is the first time I’ve looked it up. It sounds like a good thing for the parliament to be required to explicitly state when they are going against the charter of rights (is that what it’s called?).

It sounds like inception. Is this a way that generals being tested can tell if it’s a real test or not?

I assume because it’s similar to both Queen and Q-Anon?

All of my responses are from the best dad. 👉 😎 👉

I like that.