Hate to tell you but odds are your wife's new car is not "off the grid". With most new cars even if you don't setup their app, they still phone home using the build in telemetry 3g/4g modem.

Don't worry about that EU, we're working on fixing this for you.

I just looked at it for the first time ever. Instant regret.

Weather radios are a thing. They can sound alerts and often work in areas where cell coverage may be limited. Putting one in the cabin where some of the staff sleep could have prevented this as well. This was lack of planning on the part of the camp.

On most phones you can turn off just those Amber alerts without turning off the sever weather alerts.

Yea it's not Bitchchat, it's Bitch@

I don't give a shit about Apple, but I give a shit about sensationalizing misinformation.

No, they did not. I gave two examples of other apps, available in the app store today, that link to external websites to make theater ticket and digital movie purchases that do not trigger any warnings to the user. So tell me again how they broke their own rule?

Maybe read a little closer before you start spouting off next time.

Yea well ya know. I ran into it when playing with some weather data. I asked for the day in the past 20 years with the most snowfall in the past 20 years. Don't recall exactly but let's say it was 20" in a single day in 2010. I then asked for the year with the most snow fall and got something like 13" in 2008. I challenged it since I'm pretty sure 20 > 13. It insisted, and argued relentlessly that it was possible for the year with the most snowfall to have less snowfall than a single day in a different year (and that different year was inside the 20 year scope). It was like arguing with a flat earther or something. It was really funny. I don't know what MS did to their version of ChatGPT but they managed to really screw it up.

Yep, the judge should face consequences for this as well as the lawyer. Make it clear that judges should be validating case law submitted to them in their courts, and definitely should not be making rulings based on them.

The Bing version of ChatGPT, when they first rolled it out, would argue with you endlessly if you tried that. It was really funny watching it come up with bizarre ways to try to explain why it wasn't wrong.

So they didn't actually break their own rules? Not that it matters since it is their platform and they get to make the rules.

Also, it's not the only app that does this. Justwatch doesn't seem to need warnings to link you out to the web to buy digitial films from various vendors. Rotten Tomatoes app (yea they do have one, it's awful) also does not seem to require them for linking you out via the web to buy tickets to films currently in theaters. The very same thing Apple did here. So, WTF is the complaint here exactly?

Aliens is Fox, which Disney consumed, so it's on one of Disney's services (Hulu in this case). We really need mandatory licensing for back catalog films like this so any service that wants to can offer it. Meanwhile I'll keep buying my Blu-rays (which usually come with a digital copy that does work across multiple platforms if it's a Movies Anywhere title).

Small focused models are also used in some cases. You just want to go in order of cost (in compute). Start with the easy stuff like pattern matching and work your way from there.

The real problem is that it's really early days in this field for the most part. It's like the early days of the web when everyone was doing their own thing, and getting the site up was more important than anything else. Everyone is doing custom code vs off-the-shelf (either commercial or open source) for their projects and most of those devs outside the big LLM providers (and, as you just saw, maybe some inside them too) are not giving enough thought to security right now. It's just "Hey, let's buy ___ LLM's API calls for our app!" and run with it. It will work its way out eventually.

Huh, I tried ChatGPT and Claude (neither fell for it BTW, Claude even called it out) but didn't think to try Google. I am kind of shocked it worked on any of the big public LLMs interfaces. Via APIs maybe, those tend to be where these issues crop up because the APIs put a lot of the responsibility for safety on the developer. But that attack was pretty basic and I would have expected their safety checks to catch it no problem. It does illustrate the point though. The way you avoid this is to do pre-checks using traditional programming (REGEX for common patterns for example), wrap the file contents in a metadata wrapper such as XML when you inject it into the context window so the LLM knows it's not supposed to be a prompt, and there are some system prompt things you can do to dissuade the model from executing them. Apparently Google decided 'Nah'. Going to have to give the Google guys shit about that on Monday.

They already fucked themselves, they just haven't realized it yet. Well besides all the ones crying that their workers were all rounded up or fled. They know, now.