Ifotaka
Ifotaka is a town and commune in Madagascar. It belongs to the district of Amboasary Sud, which is a part of Anosy Region. The population of the commune was estimated to be approximately 18,000 in 2001 commune census.[2]
Ifotaka | |
|---|---|
  Ifotaka Location in Madagascar | |
| Coordinates: 24°48′S 46°8′E | |
| Country |  |
| Region | Anosy |
| District | Amboasary Sud |
| Elevation | 72 m (236 ft) |
| Population (2001)[2] | |
| • Total | 18,000 |
| Time zone | UTC3 (EAT) |
| Climate | BSh |
Primary and junior level secondary education are available in town. The majority 50% of the population of the commune are farmers, while an additional 40% receives their livelihood from raising livestock. The most important crop is cassava, while other important products are maize and sweet potatoes. Industry and services provide both employment for 5% of the population.[2]
References and notes
- Estimated based on DEM data from Shuttle Radar Topography Mission
- "ILO census data". Cornell University. 2002. Retrieved 2008-05-04.
| ||
|---|---|---|
| Ambovombe |  | |
| Bekily | ||
| Beloha | ||
| Tsiombe | ||
gollark: Fearsome.
gollark: I might have to release apioforms from the beecloud.
gollark: It must comfort you to think so.
gollark: > There is burgeoning interest in designing AI-basedsystems to assist humans in designing computing systems,including tools that automatically generate computer code.The most notable of these comes in the form of the first self-described ‘AI pair programmer’, GitHub Copilot, a languagemodel trained over open-source GitHub code. However, codeoften contains bugs—and so, given the vast quantity of unvettedcode that Copilot has processed, it is certain that the languagemodel will have learned from exploitable, buggy code. Thisraises concerns on the security of Copilot’s code contributions.In this work, we systematically investigate the prevalence andconditions that can cause GitHub Copilot to recommend insecurecode. To perform this analysis we prompt Copilot to generatecode in scenarios relevant to high-risk CWEs (e.g. those fromMITRE’s “Top 25” list). We explore Copilot’s performance onthree distinct code generation axes—examining how it performsgiven diversity of weaknesses, diversity of prompts, and diversityof domains. In total, we produce 89 different scenarios forCopilot to complete, producing 1,692 programs. Of these, wefound approximately 40 % to be vulnerable.Index Terms—Cybersecurity, AI, code generation, CWE
gollark: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2108.09293.pdf
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.