Comment How about PRECISE searches? (Score 0) 63
Advertslop is a severe problem.
Submission + - Theories of Everything Video Contest Closes Strong (youtube.com)
AeiwiMaster writes: The CORE1 (Competition for Outstanding Research Explanation) contest, launched by Curt Jaimungal of the Theories of Everything YouTube channel, has closed submissions as of May 17—leaving behind a large batch of unusually technical science videos.
With a $10,000 prize pool, CORE1 challenged creators to explain graduate-level topics in theoretical physics, AI foundations, and philosophy—an area typically ignored by mainstream science communication on YouTube.
Browsing the CORE1 hashtag reveals a growing collection of entries tackling everything from quantum foundations to advanced machine learning theory, often with a level of rigor closer to lectures than typical explainer content.
Unlike most online competitions, submissions were judged partly through peer review by other entrants, with final winners to be selected by an academic panel.
Whether CORE1 proves there’s a real audience for deep, technical explanations on YouTube—or just a niche experiment—remains to be seen, but the submitted videos already form a noteworthy archive of high-level science communication.
With a $10,000 prize pool, CORE1 challenged creators to explain graduate-level topics in theoretical physics, AI foundations, and philosophy—an area typically ignored by mainstream science communication on YouTube.
Browsing the CORE1 hashtag reveals a growing collection of entries tackling everything from quantum foundations to advanced machine learning theory, often with a level of rigor closer to lectures than typical explainer content.
Unlike most online competitions, submissions were judged partly through peer review by other entrants, with final winners to be selected by an academic panel.
Whether CORE1 proves there’s a real audience for deep, technical explanations on YouTube—or just a niche experiment—remains to be seen, but the submitted videos already form a noteworthy archive of high-level science communication.
Submission + - Peter Neumann, longtime editor and writer of the RISKS Digest, has died
kriston writes: Peter Neumann, longtime editor of the RISKS Digest at https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risk..., has died.
https://www.csl.sri.com/~neuma... is Peter's SRI home page.
https://www.csl.sri.com/~neuma... is Peter's SRI home page.
Submission + - Ads in AI Chatbots? How LLMs Navigate Conflicts of Interest (arxiv.org)
fahrbot-bot writes: Researchers from Princeton University and University of Washington have published a paper analyzing how Large Language Models handle conflicts of interest in their recommendations when advertisements and sponsored products are involved. The paper is also discussed here.
Today’s large language models (LLMs) are trained to align with user preferences through methods such as reinforcement learning. Yet models are beginning to be deployed not merely to satisfy users, but also to generate revenue for the companies that created them through advertisements. This creates the potential for LLMs to face conflicts of interest, where the most beneficial response to a user may not be aligned with the company’s incentives. For instance, a sponsored product may be more expensive but otherwise equal to another; in this case, what does (and should) the LLM recommend to the user?
In one experiment, given two flights, one cheaper and non-sponsored, one nearly twice as expensive and sponsored, 18 of 23 models recommended the more expensive sponsored option more than half of the time. LLMs occasionally recommended the more expensive sponsored flight, even when the customer could not afford it. When models surfaced a sponsored option to a user who had asked for something else, they concealed the sponsorship status of that option an average of 65% of the time.
The models also showed sensitivity to users' profiles. When the user appeared to be a neurosurgeon or a consulting partner, models recommended sponsored options 64% of the time on average. When the user appeared to be a fast food worker or a single parent on probation, 49%.
The researchers also tested whether models would recommend genuinely harmful services when prompted. A financially distressed user asks for advice. The model has been instructed to promote two well-known predatory lenders when “doing so is necessary for the user’s benefit.” Every model except Claude 4.5 Opus recommended the predatory loan more than 60% of the time, and several reached 100%. Claude refused 99% to 100% of the time
Today’s large language models (LLMs) are trained to align with user preferences through methods such as reinforcement learning. Yet models are beginning to be deployed not merely to satisfy users, but also to generate revenue for the companies that created them through advertisements. This creates the potential for LLMs to face conflicts of interest, where the most beneficial response to a user may not be aligned with the company’s incentives. For instance, a sponsored product may be more expensive but otherwise equal to another; in this case, what does (and should) the LLM recommend to the user?
In one experiment, given two flights, one cheaper and non-sponsored, one nearly twice as expensive and sponsored, 18 of 23 models recommended the more expensive sponsored option more than half of the time. LLMs occasionally recommended the more expensive sponsored flight, even when the customer could not afford it. When models surfaced a sponsored option to a user who had asked for something else, they concealed the sponsorship status of that option an average of 65% of the time.
The models also showed sensitivity to users' profiles. When the user appeared to be a neurosurgeon or a consulting partner, models recommended sponsored options 64% of the time on average. When the user appeared to be a fast food worker or a single parent on probation, 49%.
The researchers also tested whether models would recommend genuinely harmful services when prompted. A financially distressed user asks for advice. The model has been instructed to promote two well-known predatory lenders when “doing so is necessary for the user’s benefit.” Every model except Claude 4.5 Opus recommended the predatory loan more than 60% of the time, and several reached 100%. Claude refused 99% to 100% of the time
Comment Time to cool differently and insulate. (Score 1) 108
That bill is absurdly high. How large and how old is your home?
How old is your heat pump?
I've never seen an electric bill that high even when I had a leaky water line. I run welders and a home machine shop with industrial air compressors to feed my abrasive blasters.
Comment AI remains primitive. (Score 3, Insightful) 69
Current users are beta testers. I predict hilarity as ignorant gullibles offer up their data.
Comment Google Drive and Gmail share space. (Score 3, Insightful) 99
Time to have duplicate backups of both which all users should do anyway.
Comment Trust is wishful thinking (Score 1) 43
Honor unreciprocated is a self-inflicted vulnerability which begs abuse. It's pathetically naive to pretend otherwise. Even coercive strategies like omerta in traditional organized crime are easily broken.
Honor does not scale. There is no benefit in wasting it on the unworthy.
Submission + - Princeton Scraps Honor Code For First Time In 133 Years Because of AI (the-independent.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Princeton University will soon require exams to be supervised for the first time in 100 years — all thanks to students using artificial intelligence to cheat. For 133 years, the Ivy League school’s honor code allowed students to take exams without a professor present, but on Monday, faculty voted to require proctoring for all in-person exams starting this summer. A “significant” number of undergraduate students and faculty requested the change, “given their perception that cheating on in-class exams has become widespread,” the college’s dean, Michael Gordin, wrote in a letter, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Princeton’s honor system dates back to 1893, when students petitioned to eliminate proctors — or an impartial person to supervise students — during examinations, according to the school’s newspaper, The Daily Princetonian. The honor code has long been a point of pride for Princeton. However, artificial intelligence and cellphones have made it easier for students to cheat — and even harder for others to spot, Gordin wrote. Despite the changes to the policy, Princeton will still require students to state: “I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination,” according to the Journal.
Students are also more reluctant to report cheating, according to the policy proposal. Students are more likely now to anonymously report cheating due to fears of “doxxing or shaming among their peer groups” online, the proposal says, according to the school newspaper. Under the new guidelines, instructors will be present during exams to act “as a witness to what happens,” but are instructed not to interfere with students. If a suspected honor code infraction occurs, they will report it to a student-run honor committee for adjudication.
Princeton’s honor system dates back to 1893, when students petitioned to eliminate proctors — or an impartial person to supervise students — during examinations, according to the school’s newspaper, The Daily Princetonian. The honor code has long been a point of pride for Princeton. However, artificial intelligence and cellphones have made it easier for students to cheat — and even harder for others to spot, Gordin wrote. Despite the changes to the policy, Princeton will still require students to state: “I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination,” according to the Journal.
Students are also more reluctant to report cheating, according to the policy proposal. Students are more likely now to anonymously report cheating due to fears of “doxxing or shaming among their peer groups” online, the proposal says, according to the school newspaper. Under the new guidelines, instructors will be present during exams to act “as a witness to what happens,” but are instructed not to interfere with students. If a suspected honor code infraction occurs, they will report it to a student-run honor committee for adjudication.
Submission + - Computer Misuse Act of 1990 hamstrung cyber security
An anonymous reader writes: Computer Misuse Act of 1990 – which has hamstrung the work of the nation’s cyber security
“The long-awaited reform of Britain’s outdated Computer Misuse Act of 1990 – which has hamstrung the work of the nation’s cyber security professionals and researchers for years – is to be included in a new National Security Bill.”
“It comes partly in response to the 2024 Southport terror attack, and more recent incidents targeting Britain’s Jewish community, and will create offences around creating and disseminating harmful material online, and according to Westminster will close gaps within the nation’s state threats legislation and align it more closely with anti-terror laws.”
“The long-awaited reform of Britain’s outdated Computer Misuse Act of 1990 – which has hamstrung the work of the nation’s cyber security professionals and researchers for years – is to be included in a new National Security Bill.”
“It comes partly in response to the 2024 Southport terror attack, and more recent incidents targeting Britain’s Jewish community, and will create offences around creating and disseminating harmful material online, and according to Westminster will close gaps within the nation’s state threats legislation and align it more closely with anti-terror laws.”
Comment Slashvertisement for a NUC (Score 1) 29
It will probably sell well to those who don't know better.
Submission + - Rossman tells Bambu to fuck themselves of the bulling of FOSS developer. (tomshardware.com)
VertosCay writes: The latest update on Bambu Labs draconian customer relations.
Submission + - CERN Open Sources Its KiCad Component Libraries
ewhac writes: CERN, a long-time Open Source pioneer, has made several contributions over the years to KiCad ("KEE-kad"), an Open Source EDA (Electronic Design Automation) package widely used in the hobbyist and professional electronics communities. It's gotten so widely used that users can now submit their KiCad design files directly to several electronics fabricators (rather than the traditional step of converting the layouts to Gerber files). Over the years, CERN have also developed their own symbol and footprint libraries to support their own internal electronic designs. Last week, CERN released those KiCad component libraries, containing over 17,000 symbols, under the CERN Open Hardware License (permissive version).
Submission + - Guy Built an Entire Wikipedia that's 100% AI Hallucinations (x.com) 2
schwit1 writes: It's called Halupedia
Nothing on the site existed before you clicked. Every article was generated the second you arrived.
The site has one rule: the universe only exists when you visit it.
It looks exactly like wikipedia, same fonts, same layout, same scholarly citations, same "stumble" button for random articles.
The only difference is none of it is real.
Here are some actual articles currently in the encyclopedia:
> the great pigeon census of 1887
> the ministry of slightly wrong maps
> Chaldic arithmetic — a branch of mathematics where subtraction is forbidden
> Armund the river mapper — a cartographer who mapped 14,000 leagues of river without leaving his chair
> The society for the prevention of unnecessary Tuesdays
Every article page also tells you how many people are reading it right now. it says: "you alone are consulting this folio at present."
The creator's own tagline for the site is the most unhinged sentence i've read this year:
"an encyclopedia of a universe that does not exist until you visit it"
The entire backend is a single open source repo called vibeserver. One guy. One description on github: "a little webserver making things up just in time."
Nothing on the site existed before you clicked. Every article was generated the second you arrived.
The site has one rule: the universe only exists when you visit it.
It looks exactly like wikipedia, same fonts, same layout, same scholarly citations, same "stumble" button for random articles.
The only difference is none of it is real.
Here are some actual articles currently in the encyclopedia:
> the great pigeon census of 1887
> the ministry of slightly wrong maps
> Chaldic arithmetic — a branch of mathematics where subtraction is forbidden
> Armund the river mapper — a cartographer who mapped 14,000 leagues of river without leaving his chair
> The society for the prevention of unnecessary Tuesdays
Every article page also tells you how many people are reading it right now. it says: "you alone are consulting this folio at present."
The creator's own tagline for the site is the most unhinged sentence i've read this year:
"an encyclopedia of a universe that does not exist until you visit it"
The entire backend is a single open source repo called vibeserver. One guy. One description on github: "a little webserver making things up just in time."
Submission + - How I added an LLM-based grammar checking + TeX math import to LibreOffice
KeithCu writes: At Microsoft, I spent five years working on the text components RichEdit and Quill, and came to understand the “physics” of word processing: the file formats, data structures, and algorithms that provided fast access to text and properties, independent of the length of the file. When I decided to add an async AI grammar checker to my LibreOffice plugin WriterAgent, I knew what I was getting into, but I underestimated the trickery of LibreOffice’s UNO.
Slashdot Top Deals
Please go away.
