与「CUBE」相关的搜索结果

GeoLibre v2.3.0 is here! GeoLibre is a free and open-source, lightweight, cloud-native GIS platform for visualizing, exploring, and analyzing geospatial data. It runs everywhere you do, in the web browser, on the desktop, on mobile, and inside Jupyter notebooks, all while keeping your data local and private. This release brings a legend that writes itself from your symbology, a new GeoLens catalog browser, and 200+ GeoLibre Rust geoprocessing tools running entirely in the browser. What's new in v2.3.0 - Automatic on-map Legend: the legend builds itself from your visible layers, with class rows for graduated, categorized, rule-based, and expression styling, gradient bars for heatmaps and raster colormaps, and land-cover labels from a Raster Attribute Table. Rename, hide, reorder, or add your own entries, and it saves with the project. - Symbology swatches in the Layers panel: every row shows a dot, line, square, or image glyph in the layer's own color, so a tall layer stack reads at a glance. - GeoLens catalog browser: connect to a self-hosted GeoLens server, search its catalog, and add datasets as vector tiles, GeoJSON, or rendered raster tiles. - Emerging Hot Spot Analysis: build a space-time cube from timestamped points and classify every cell as a new, intensifying, persistent, diminishing, sporadic, oscillating, or historical hot or cold spot, all client side. - Mosaic time series: the Time Slider now steps through MosaicJSON and STAC collections of many COGs per date, on either a GPU or a WASM rendering engine. - Copy and paste layer styles: give a whole set of layers one consistent look without restyling each in turn. - Shareable tool links: deep-link any Whitebox tool with a ?tool= URL that opens the dialog preselected and pre-fills the form, with a Copy link button to build it for you. - Smarter data loading: pick which layers to load from a multi-layer GeoPackage, import CSVs whose coordinates are in any projected CRS, and read a raster's real CRS, pixel size, and extent from the metadata dialog. - Multiple AI profiles: define several provider, model, and credential setups, pick a default, and switch between them from the assistant panel. Try it out - Launch GeoLibre Web: - GitHub: - Documentation: - Release notes: #GIS# #Geospatial# #OpenSource# #RemoteSensing# #MapLibre# #GeoLibre#

Strange Universe. Math, Physics, Reality. "6 belts are anchored on the outside to a fixed frame, and on the inside to a spinning cube. Although the cube spins continuously in one direction the belts never become tangled. The belts return to their original configuration when the cube has rotated 720 degrees." - Jason Hise,

One thing I find striking in the discourse between AI 2040 and its detractors is that the two seem to be locked in to totally incompatible worldviews of how fast and how much of a big deal AI progress is: * In AI 2040, every scenario sees superintelligence of some kind emerging by 2040, unless a herculean effort is made to completely stop it * Detractors say things like "AI 2040 is naive about human coordination ability and a threat to freedom", but don't seem to see any naivety in assuming that the ASI transition will just go well by default, don't seem to see ASI itself as a massive power concentrator risk, and don't seem to feel fear of humanity's "hard power" dropping to zero if ASIs can do literally every task better than we can. This stance makes total sense in a "AI is normal technology" world, zero sense in a world where superintelligence is possible by 2030 and almost guaranteed by 2040 I think my beliefs are: - If I was confident that (present-day-style) AI is normal technology, I would be in the detractor camp - If I was confident that superintelligence is coming in 2030 by default, I would be closer to the AI 2040 camp - it's naive, but every other option is naive squared? But my problem is that I feel great uncertainty and have no idea which of the two worlds (or some other third thing) we're living in? Hence why I continue to be open-minded about slowdowns/pauses, but also I feel very uncomfortable with the "open source bad, the good outcome is the one where our guys have controlling global dominance" push coming from some major AI companies and intellectuals - in a "normal" world that's the sort of thing that triggers every political alarm bell at the same time. A big reason why I have been advocating and trying my best to support the d/acc platform (rapid up-skilling in formal verification, cryptography, secure and open hardware, pandemic resistance and other defensive biotech, food and basic resource security, public epistemics, non-power-concentrating versions of physical security) is that these things are clearly worth doing in both worlds. The 2040 plan is already much more open source friendly (even mandating it! yay). It also includes "mutually assured compute destruction" ideas which (if they work) effectively give one of 2-5 actors the ability to trigger a global compute winter - as opposed to giving 1-5 actors the ability to selectively disenfranchise people they consider baddies while exempting themselves. This is also a big improvement. So I can see the earnest attempts to improve along the dimensions detractors criticize on ("does this concentrate power in big AI labs and superpower governments?"), and I appreciate this. I think many people don't appreciate enough the differences between different "kinds" of pause buttons, and how some concentrate power far more than others. Probably we can think harder and improve even more here. But on the "slowdown/pause or not" topic, there isn't a magic "escape the tradeoff" button. The Hansonian in me says: the winning deal is a deal which, from the perspective of both sides' present-day beliefs and knowledge, both sides would accept, though for different reasons. If the crux is AI progress speed, then identify a set of pre-agreed triggers for "okay, serious shit is happening" [super-pandemics? >25% unemployment? something involving slaughterbots?], and pre-agree that we become much more open-minded to the slowdown or pause thing if enough triggers come to pass within some timeframe. 2040 detractors (who clearly implicitly think that we'll see amazing speedup of progress from AI but think that what I call the "serious shit" category is overhyped) will accept expecting that the triggers don't come to pass, and AI worriers will accept expecting that they will. Pre-agreeing on the specific triggers means that once the triggers either hit or don't hit, there is stronger legitimacy around the idea that one side's worldview turned out more correct and we should be more inclined toward their program. If I were @elonmusk (or zuck, or...) I would re-tool twitter much more heavily into being a platform for helping to identify and make these kinds of grand win-win deals, so that we can bypass big-country governments and big-company CEOs and big nonprofit intellectuals and give more people a voice in the discussion. It's possibly one of the best things that social media _could_ do for humanity if it wanted to. But again, maybe this is also naive. Actually, probably it's naive. But currently, I see zero plans for how to deal with an ASI transition that are not naive. Perhaps humanity is stuck with a choice between naive and naive squared (or maybe even naive squared and naive cubed), so I feel inclined to cut some slack to people who are trying.

The State of Mythic Items in #DiabloIV# is very disappointing right now. It is now WAY too much RNG & basically impossible for an avg player to get their hands on FOUND iconic Mythic Items. You can only use ONE crafted at a time. I personally got more than 100 Mythic Items in 100h playtime, but only found a SINGLE Iconic Mythic. Obviously it wasnt the one I needed & even it was it has 2 random stats😂 Resplendent Sparks & Pandemonium Fragments crafting also feel pretty useless: I could have 1 Million Resplendent Sparks to craft a Grandfather but I would still not be able to equip it as my Melted Heart already has the "Crafted" tag. A possible solution could be to seperate iconic Mythic Crafting & new Mythic Cube crafting to allow us to equip 1 each or just remove the crafting restriction all together 🤷‍♂️ Thoughts & data:

腾讯偷偷开源的这个大杀器，直接把 AI Agent 沙箱的性能干穿了！ 今天刷 GitHub 看到腾讯云刚出来的 CubeSandbox。这玩意简单说就是给 AI Agent 跑代码、搞自动化的“极速隔离房”。底层基于 RustVMM 开发，完全兼容了外网爆火的 E2B SDK（开源良心 Apache 2.0 协议）。别以为大厂出品就得吃大资源，这玩意普通人单机就能直接搞起。 懂的都懂，现在搞 Agent 自动化最烦的就是环境隔离，又慢又吃内存。这波有点狠，看核心干货： 🔥 极致轻量：单沙箱内存占用不到 5MB，一台机子轻松并发几千个 Agent。 ⚡️ 毫秒级启动：冷启动只要 60 毫秒，Agent 调工具根本感觉不到延迟。 🛡️ 硬核防翻车：硬件级底层隔离，AI 怎么发癫乱跑脚本也搞不坏宿主机。 💰 省钱利器：支持闲置自动挂起暂停，资源秒释放，白嫖党狂喜。 🔗 GitHub 传送门：

Robot learning is moving beyond policies built for one robot, one scene, one task. At MIT, we’re exploring a different path: turning video world models into embodiment-agnostic robot policies. Introducing VERA: a 14B video-to-action system that controls robots across embodiments, skills, and environments. From zero-shot pick-and-place on a real Panda arm to contact-rich cube reorientation with a 16-DoF robotic hand. Different robots. Different environments. Different tasks. Same video planner. Same weights. We’re open-sourcing everything so you can fine-tune VERA for your own robot setup too. Deep dive in the thread: 🔗 🧵 (1/7)