It's entirely reasonable for the USG to say "we don't want to use a product with guardrails". Plenty of people have gotten annoyed with Fable and done exactly that!
But to prohibit anyone else from using it is a much bigger and more questionable step.
> But to prohibit anyone else from using it is a much bigger and more questionable step.
What do you mean? You and I are not prohibited from using Anthropic products unless we do work for DoD/DoW that collides with their usage restrictions.
Yeah, I was aware of those... but I just couldn't bring myself to write American, especially in the current political climate. You can consider those a non-tariff trade barrier.
As a heavily disaffected American (who still can't wrap his head around the fact that we let this happen twice) I support any form of protest against us.
(In all seriousness, I've been reading AWS launch posts for 20 years; this one was mainly imitating the S3 Files launch post but I diverged by adding the customer quote and the FAQ -- because of course I started this process with a PRFAQ, and some of the questions in the FAQ are legitimately important.)
I left 18 months ago, so my memory is a bit fuzzy, but there was at least an overall style guide, one for each post type (e.g. a launch announcement), and the style for procedures (inherited from AWS Docs).
Oh, I was being facetious. I'm pretty sure Jeff mentioned needing to spend time writing a style guide when he started having other Amazonians write posts for "his" blog.
Oh, I assumed that "style guide" meant things like starting launch posts with "I'm excited to announce", providing a simple demonstration of how to use the service, including screenshots, including a customer quote if available, and ensuring that pricing and availability were clearly laid out.
There are, internally, and theyre pretty good. I always tried to use the AWS Docs style guide when writing internally, for example. Theyre specific on how to refer to products vs services vs features, which nouns to use, tone, grammar, etc.
PS: you might get tripped up on 0x00, 0x2F, or similar control characters? As i recall any valid octet can be included in a label. We definitely saw literal ‘*’ and ‘.’ inside labels. And I wouldnt be surprised to find a bell in there either.
An 8oz serving of milk (236 ml) has 12 g of carbohydrate.
People tend to add single or double cream (1/2 & 1/2 or whipping / heavy cream, respectively, in the US) to coffee, both of which have less carbohydrate, and generally add a tablespoon or two (15--30 ml) per cup of coffee. The carbohydrate content is < 2g.
That's unlikely to bring someone out of a ketosis state, which requires a daily intake of < 15--30g. That's about two full cups (450 ml) of single cream.
I never looked before today, but always thought it was the other way around.
> That's unlikely to bring someone out of a ketosis state, which requires a daily intake of < 15--30g
Also neat to know.
I only know the impact that a Dunks coffee (with cream) has on my blood sugar (and how much insulin I need to take to counteract it). So this has been a learning experience for me. Thanks
Right. Laws passed by the elected civilian government.
This is not some wild far right maga conspiracy theory to think that the military must be subservient to and separate from the government, just because the Americans elected a president we don't like.
You seem to think the US government is a single monolithic entity. It isn't. Laws are passed by Congress. The Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces does not create laws. The issue under discussion, which you apparently don't understand, is the obligations of members of the armed forces in the increasingly likely situation that the the Commander-in-Chief gives orders that contradict the law.
> You seem to think the US government is a single monolithic entity.
Strawman. That is an invention entirely of your imagination. Nowhere did I claim or imply this.
> orders that contradict the law.
They are to be subservient to civilian government at all times, yes. If the civilian government breaks down then obviously they are in a difficult position but usurping the laws or processes of the government is not their obligation.
I'm actually flabbergasted that the "enlightened minds" on here don't have the slightest clue why the military should be subservient to the democratically elected civilian government, apparently some don't even know what the term liberal democracy means, yet have no trouble pontificating like know it all techbros.
But to prohibit anyone else from using it is a much bigger and more questionable step.
reply