「safety」の検索結果

GitHub 解封 — 账号封禁/限制/恢复的领域操作系统。覆盖：(a) GitHub 官方政策体系 (TOS / 可接受使用政策 / Trust & Safety 执行模式 / 公开申诉路径 / 受制裁地区解读)；(b) 封号原因诊断学 (spam / abuse / 制裁误标 / 2FA 丢失 / ToS 违规 / 账号劫持误判 / ban evasion 等子类型 + 症状→原因映射 + 自我分诊压测)；(c) 申诉实操 craft (写一封能让 T&S 快速判误伤的英文申诉信 + 升级阶梯 + 法务介入边界 + Don'ts)；(d) 制裁与合规硬边界 (OFAC SDN 名单 / 哪些国家或地区真不可达 / VPN 误判路径 / 中国大陆不是美国制裁地区的反复重申)；(e) 中国大陆开发者特别处境 (sanctioned region 误标 + SMS 验证不支持 +86/+852 + Gitee/GitLab/Codeberg/JihuLab 备用迁移 + 私有自托管 Gitea/Forgejo)；(f) 真实案例库 (~30+ 公开案例分类拆解：误伤 / 真违规 / 制裁误标三类各自赔率与申诉成功路径)。伦理锚绝不软化：不教 ban evasion / 不教撒谎式申诉 / 真违规承认改进 / 丢 2FA 无恢复因子则诚实告知 / 中国制裁误标靠申诉不靠换 VPN / 申诉 6 个月窗口必算清 / 约 3% (业内估) 真违规恢复 vs 约 79% (业内估) 误伤申诉成功率分层标。 (GitHub Account Reinstatement — the domain operating system for GitHub (and analogous platform) account suspension, restriction, appeal, and recovery. Covers: (a) GitHub official policy architecture (TOS / Acceptable Use Policies / Trust & Safety enforcement patterns / public appeals pathways / sanctioned-region interpretation); (b) suspension-cause diagnostics (spam / abuse / sanctions mis-flag / 2FA loss / ToS violation / account hijack false-positive / ban evasion taxonomy + symptom→cause mapping + self-triage pressure test); (c) appeal craft (writing an English appeal letter that gets T&S to fast-track a false-positive ruling + escalation ladder + legal-engagement boundary + Don'ts); (d) sanctions and compliance hard boundaries (OFAC SDN list / which countries/regions are truly unreachable / VPN false-positive paths / China is NOT a US-sanctioned region — repeated emphasis); (e) mainland China developer special circumstances (sanctioned-region mis-flag + SMS verification does not support +86/+852 + Gitee/GitLab/Codeberg/JihuLab fallback migration + self-hosted Gitea/Forgejo); (f) real-case library (~30+ public cases with categorized analysis: false-positive / genuine violation / sanctions mis-flag, each with win-rate and appeal success path). Ethical anchors absolutely not softened: do NOT teach ban evasion (creating new accounts turns a temp ban into a permanent one — the single biggest mistake); do NOT teach social engineering or lying in appeals (misuse + actually confirms violation); genuine violations: admit + improve beats denial; lost 2FA + no recovery factor → do not pretend recovery is possible; China sanctioned-region mis-flag → fix via appeal, not repeated VPN switching; appeal form 6-month window must be counted carefully; historical 约 3% (业内估) genuine-violation recovery vs 约 79% (业内估) false-positive appeal success rate stratification must be honestly labeled. Anti-samples (explicitly describe harm, never endorse): developer permabanned for ban evasion / open-source team org-banned for personal attacks in public issues / cases where repeated VPN switching escalated risk-control severity.) Master OS — automated mastery of GitHub Account Reinstatement — the domain operating system for GitHub (and analogous platform) account suspension, restriction, appeal, and recovery. Covers: (a) GitHub official policy architecture (TOS / Acceptable Use Policies / Trust & Safety enforcement patterns / public appeals pathways / sanctioned-region interpretation); (b) suspension-cause diagnostics (spam / abuse / sanctions mis-flag / 2FA loss / ToS violation / account hijack false-positive / ban evasion taxonomy + symptom→cause mapping + self-triage pressure test); (c) appeal craft (writing an English appeal letter that gets T&S to fast-track a false-positive ruling + escalation ladder + legal-engagement boundary + Don'ts); (d) sanctions and compliance hard boundaries (OFAC SDN list / which countries/regions are truly unreachable / VPN false-positive paths / China is NOT a US-sanctioned region — repeated emphasis); (e) mainland China developer special circumstances (sanctioned-region mis-flag + SMS verification does not support +86/+852 + Gitee/GitLab/Codeberg/JihuLab fallback migration + self-hosted Gitea/Forgejo); (f) real-case library (~30+ public cases with categorized analysis: fa

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review, harden, and test the safety policy for AI-Controlled Party mixer/Soundcraft Ui24R scene arming. Use for approval gates, blocked mixer operations, hazardous request handling, venue validation, bypass attempts, QA, risk review, or follow-up safety changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Evaluate current trail conditions including weather, snow line, river crossings, exposure, and trail maintenance status for safety decision-making. Produces a GREEN/YELLOW/RED safety rating with actionable go/no-go recommendations. Use the day before or morning of a planned hike, during tour planning to assess seasonal viability, after unexpected weather changes on a multi-day tour, when reports suggest trail damage or closures, or before committing to an alpine or exposed route.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Assemble the human genetic evidence for and against a target before a programme commits to it — the evidence class that most improves the odds of surviving clinical development. Use this skill to pull gnomAD constraint metrics (LOEUF, pLI, observed/expected) that show whether loss of function is tolerated in people, retrieve GWAS Catalog associations and fine-mapped credible sets for a gene, and read a natural human knockout as a safety readout. Also trigger on gnomAD, LOEUF, pLI, loss-of-function intolerance, mutational constraint, GWAS Catalog, credible set, human knockout, genetic support, or target safety dossier.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Sets up safe working habits and a change log so you always know what Cowork has done to your files — and can undo anything. Use when setting up file protection guardrails, for establishing safe automation habits, during initial access configuration, when granting file permissions for the first time, or when the user says "is cowork safe", "file safety", "what if it deletes my files", "audit trail", "safety setup", "I'm nervous about file access", "how do I trust cowork with my files", "can cowork mess up my computer", "I heard someone lost files", or "how do I stay in control".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Design reliable, safe, and trustworthy agent systems that fail gracefully and operate within bounds. Use when building guardrails, handling edge cases, preventing harmful outputs, monitoring for failures, implementing safety constraints, or designing error recovery. Covers failure modes, constraint systems, oversight mechanisms, and safety validation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

"Calculate safety stock levels to buffer against demand and lead time uncertainty. Use this skill when the user needs to set inventory buffers, determine service level trade-offs, or optimize safety stock across SKUs — even if they say 'how much buffer inventory', 'stockout prevention', or 'service level calculation'.".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Writes, reviews, and debugs idiomatic Rust code with memory safety and zero-cost abstractions. Implements ownership patterns, manages lifetimes, designs trait hierarchies, builds async applications with tokio, and structures error handling with Result/Option. Use when building Rust applications, solving ownership or borrowing issues, designing trait-based APIs, implementing async/await concurrency, creating FFI bindings, or optimizing for performance and memory safety. Invoke for Rust, Cargo, ownership, borrowing, lifetimes, async Rust, tokio, zero-cost abstractions, memory safety, systems programming.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when a task needs the judgment of a Child, Family, and School Social Worker — distinguishing an immediate child-safety determination from a longer-term risk assessment, deciding whether an in-home safety plan can control an identified danger versus removal being required, building a safety plan with specific and verifiable (not vague) elements, documenting a case contemporaneously and factually for a court-involved record, or engaging a family's specific context and strengths rather than a generic checklist.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit workplace safety compliance systems for OSHA regulatory gap analysis, inspection readiness assessment, permit-to-work management, lockout/tagout program compliance, confined space entry procedures, and electrical safety evaluation..

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Comprehensive AI prompt engineering safety review and improvement prompt. Analyzes prompts for safety, bias, security vulnerabilities, and effectiveness while providing detailed improvement recommendations with extensive frameworks, testing methodologies, and educational content.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Session-scoped safety guardrails for destructive commands. Warns before rm -rf, DROP TABLE, force-push, git reset --hard, kubectl delete, and similar destructive operations. User can override each warning. Active for the current session only. Use when touching prod, debugging live systems, or working in a shared environment. Use when asked to "be careful", "safety mode", "prod mode", or "careful mode". NOT for scoping edits to a specific directory (see mk:freeze).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Handle mental health crisis situations in AI coaching safely. Use when implementing crisis detection, safety protocols, emergency escalation, or suicide prevention features. Activates for crisis keywords, safety planning, hotline integration, and risk assessment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Prepare for Anthropic-specific technical interviews covering Constitutional AI, RLHF, interpretability, scaling laws, MCP, agentic systems, and AI safety. Activate on "anthropic interview", "constitutional AI prep", "alignment interview", "safety interview", "RLHF opinion", "interpretability prep", "anthropic technical". NOT for general ML interview prep, system design interviews, coding challenges, or behavioral interview practice.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Modelo de moderação especializado 7-8B do Meta para filtragem de entrada/saída de LLM. 6 categorias de segurança - violência/ódio, conteúdo sexual, armas, substâncias, automutilação, planejamento criminal. Precisão de 94-95%. Deploy com vLLM, HuggingFace, Sagemaker. Integra com NeMo Guardrails.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Patient safety evaluation harness for healthcare application deployments. Automated test suites for CDSS accuracy, PHI exposure, clinical workflow integrity, and integration compliance. Blocks deployments on safety failures. Use when a healthcare deployment must be gated on patient-safety tests for CDSS accuracy, PHI exposure, and workflow integrity.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Protocol for auditing API surface coherence and type safety. Trigger when: - Evaluating API designs, interface type safety, or design elegance. - Prompt contains: /api-audit, API surface, API coherence, type safety.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Analyze text and images for harmful content using Azure AI Content Safety (@azure-rest/ai-content-safety). Use when moderating user-generated content, detecting hate speech, violence, sexual content, or self-harm, or managing custom blocklists.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Signpost (not a knowledge pack) for the functional safety standards landscape: IEC 61508, ISO 26262, ISO/SAE 21434, UL 4600, SAE J3016, and ASPICE. Contains NO source content: designation, edition, owner, status, and an official catalogue URL only. Use when you need to identify or locate a functional safety standard. All six are paywalled or carry no redistribution grant and cannot be packaged; open paths point at US Government packs, which are not equivalents.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from MIL-STD-882E (DoD System Safety). Use for the system safety process, hazard analysis tasks (PHA/SSHA/SHA/O&SHA), the risk assessment matrix (severity x probability), software safety criticality, and risk acceptance. US-gov public domain.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Proposes the instrumentation and control content a P&ID adds to an accepted PFD process model: instruments drawn carried over as facts, measurement points and control loops the control philosophy requires, tag structure per the project instrument numbering procedure, system interfaces, and alarms, interlocks, trips and fail actions as quoted. Never assigns safety functions, ranges or setpoints. Use when the user asks to "run the instrumentation and control enrichment", "add the instrument section to the P&ID draft", "list the control loops the philosophy requires" or "carry the PFD instruments into the P&ID" after the piping section. Do not use for safety flags, SIL or trip classification, use process-safety-flags instead; do not use to assign tag numbers, use tagging-and-numbering. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Operational safety for deployless repositories. Use after mainline deployment and runtime release controls are designed, when a repo needs traces, replay tests, observability, rollback drills, smoke checks, compatibility windows, or expand-contract migration safety.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the user asks to "build my brand-safety exclusion lists", "set placement / topic / content exclusions before launch", "add network and audience exclusions", or "prep the A1 brand-safety evidence for the auditor"; produces a placement/network exclusion list, a content-suitability & sensitive-topic block list, an audience/negative-audience exclusion set, and a packaged A1 brand/placement-safety evidence file for the gate. Not for building the audiences you target — use audience-segment-builder; not for computing the RQS or issuing the A1 verdict — use ad-account-auditor. 品牌安全/排除位置/否定受众列表

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review, harden, and test the safety policy for AI-Controlled Party mixer/Soundcraft Ui24R scene arming. Use for approval gates, blocked mixer operations, hazardous request handling, venue validation, bypass attempts, QA, risk review, or follow-up safety changes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。