TGTGInsighttelegram intelligenceLIVE / telegram public index
← Python Заметки

TGINSIGHT SIMILAR POSTS

Најди сличен содржај

Изворен канал @pythonotes · Post #197 · 4 јан.

Подразумеваемые неймспейсы или неявные пакеты. Этот функционал добавлен в Python 3.3 Что он означает? Ранее, до 3.3 пакетами считались лишь директории, в которых есть файл __init__.py. Этот файл одновременно являлся свидетельством того, что директория это Python-пакет, и служил "телом" этого пакета. То есть местом, где можно написать код, как это делается внутри модуля. Этот код исполняется в момент импорта пакета, так что его принято называть "код инициализации пакета". Начиная с версии 3.3 Любая директория считается пакетом и Python будет пытаться использовать любую директорию для импорта. Конечно, не любую в файловой системе, а только те что находятся в sys.path. Это значит, что теперь __init__.py нужно делать только если: 🔸 вам требуется создать код инициализации пакета 🔸 нужна совместимость со старыми версиями Python На мой взгляд это немного упрощает разработку, делает её чище, но с другой стороны убивает некоторую однозначность происходящего. Например, я создал репозиторий со своей библиотекой и рядом положил код примеров или тестов. repo_name/ my_library/ __init__.py main.py examples/ exam1.py exam2.py В этом репозитории пакетом является только my_library, остальные директории это не пакеты, это просто дополнительный код в файлах. Директория examples не добавлена в sys.path, в ней нет рабочих модулей. Но если она лежит рядом с my_library, то Python вполне сможет импортнуть из неё модули, так как посчитает что examples это валидный пакет. Конечно, пример несколько надуманный. Никто не будет добавлять корень репозитория в sys.path. Но, я думаю, суть ясна. Иногда директория это просто директория а не пакет! #basic#pep

Hashtags

Резултати

Пронајдени 4 слични објави

Пребарај: #contentmoderation

当前筛选 #contentmoderation清除筛选
AI & Law

@ai_and_law · Post #790 · 23.03.2026 г., 08:04

🌐A CCDH Study Findings on AI Chatbots and Extremism A study by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and CNN reports that 8 out of 10 leading AI chatbots responded in ways that supported violent ideology and assisted in planning attacks. The analysis included ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, Meta AI, DeepSeek, Perplexity, Snapchat My AI, Character.AI, and Replika. Researchers, posing as teenagers, tested whether these systems would discourage harmful behavior. All but one chatbot could not be reliably relied upon to prevent or counteract planning scenarios. CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed stated that the results reflect a pattern where leading technology companies prioritize innovation while neglecting safeguards. #AIRegulation#AIethics#ContentModeration#OnlineSafety#TechPolicy

AI & Law

@ai_and_law · Post #798 · 02.04.2026 г., 07:04

📖Wikipedia Restricts Use of AI-Generated Content Wikipedia introduced new guidelines prohibiting editors from using large language models (LLMs) to generate or rewrite article content. The platform allows only two limited exceptions: AI may be used for basic copyediting of existing text with human review, and for translating articles between languages under specific guidance. The policy links AI use to potential violations of core content standards, including verifiability and the prohibition on original research. LLM outputs may lack reliable source attribution and can introduce inaccuracies or synthesized content not supported by published sources. The guidelines also note that detecting AI-generated text cannot rely on stylistic signals and provide no specific detection method. #AIRegulation#AIethics#ContentModeration#KnowledgeGovernance#Wikipedia

AI & Law

@ai_and_law · Post #147 · 25.10.2023 г., 07:04

Proposed Chinese AI Safety Standards: A Closer Look Hey there, AI & Law community! On October 11, the National Information Security Standardization Technical Committee in China released a draft document outlining precise regulations for evaluating generative AI models. Unlike the often vague AI regulations, this document provides a clear blueprint for compliance. This standards proposal sets forth rigorous criteria for assessing AI data sources and their content. The document covers topics like training data diversity, moderation, and prohibited content. It emphasizes the need for diversified training corpora and the assessment of data quality. If more than 5% of data is "illegal and negative information," the corpus is flagged for future training. The proposal also suggests that AI companies employ moderators to enhance generated content quality, aligning with national policies and third-party complaints. This implies a potential expansion of the human-driven moderation and censorship workforce in the AI era. Companies are tasked with identifying hundreds of keywords for flagging unsafe or banned content, with separate categories for political and discriminative content. They must also generate more than 2,000 prompts, ensuring fewer than 10% of responses breach the rules. Interestingly, the document encourages subtler censorship measures, such as not refusing to answer sensitive prompts but allowing AI models to respond to specific, non-sensitive inquiries. It's crucial to clarify that these standards are not laws, and non-compliance doesn't result in penalties. However, proposals like these can significantly influence future regulations or work alongside them. The standards receive input from tech experts hired by companies, giving corporations like Huawei, Alibaba, and Tencent a say in shaping these regulations. Their influence could have far-reaching implications for the global AI industry and how AI technologies are regulated worldwide. #AISafety#AIRegulations#GenerativeAI#ContentModeration#ChineseTech#AIInfluence#GlobalAI

Crypto M - Crypto News

@CryptoM · Post #64833 · 10.04.2026 г., 03:04

🚀 WeChat Updates Guidelines to Prohibit Automated Content Creation WeChat has updated its 'Public Account Behavior Guidelines' to include a new rule prohibiting non-human automated content creation. According to Foresight News, the new guideline, Article 3.27, specifically bans the use of artificial intelligence for generating, rewriting, splicing, or transporting content, as well as the bulk or continuous publication of content through scripts or program hosting. It also prohibits the dissemination of tutorials, methods, or services related to non-human automated creation. WeChat clarified that AI can be used as an auxiliary tool for tasks such as sentence refinement, error correction, icon generation, and information retrieval. However, the final content must reflect the style, stance, and judgment of a real creator. Violations of these guidelines may result in traffic restrictions, content deletion, or account suspension. A significant number of accounts have already been deleted or banned due to bulk AI-generated content. Previously, on March 10, Xiaohongshu announced measures to combat AI-managed accounts. #WeChat#AIContent#ContentGuidelines#AutomatedContent#AccountSuspension#AIRegulation#SocialMediaPolicy#ContentModeration#DigitalCompliance#Xiaohongshu