Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Basic question (Score 2) 78

Why isn't there a second independent AI that examines the main AI's output, and decides if it should be censored or not. If it thinks so, the answer is not delivered.

Since the second one is only looking at the first AI's output it seems like it would be difficult or impossible to fool it, especially if it's window is very short (like only the current message).

I assume there is some reason this does not work. Any explanations?

Comment Re:Wont be suprised if the US goverment (Score 2) 182

"The only solution" is in fact, not the "only" solution.

The correct and LEGAL means for the police to gain access to the phone is to take it and seal it in a tamperproof container (aka electronic Faraday Evidence Bag), go to a court and ask for a warrant to search the contents.

We have established LAW and procedures for the state to gain access to the device. It is inconvenient ON PURPOSE. and serves as a checks and balance in legal proceedings.

Comment Re:it is destroying evidence like it or not (Score 3, Informative) 182

IF that is the case, seize the phone, get a Search Warrant.

The problem is, the state couldn't be bothered following ESTABLISHED law and procedures.

Simply accusing someone of some unspecified crime isn't a right the state has to just bypass Constitutional protections, namely the 4th and 5th Amendments.

Americans have rights, secured in our founding Constitution. I don't care what feelings one might have to the rest of the case. Rights exist, enshrined and we ought to defend them tirelessly forever.

Comment Re:If he is found guilty (Score 4, Insightful) 182

There is some established case law that says that one cannot be compelled to give up a Password, Pin or Pattern Unlock, as a violation of the 4th and 5th Amendment.

Those Amendments are key to a person's rights to be SECURE. Which is the key word here. He SECURED his rights, under duress, by refusing to comply.

THIS is separate from the police chasing him as a possible criminal for crimes I may or may not like.

Rights work by being the STARTING POINT, not an afterthought or worse, something the state can simply ignore in an attempt to prosecute people for potential criminal activity.

The state has legal remedies they ought to seek if they want access to secured personal property. We all know what that is. GET A WARRANT, which is almost always a rubber stamp (very easy bar to jump over). They couldn't even be bothered with that.

Everyone ought to understand, if we do not defend our rights, the state certainly won't.

Comment Re:this (Score 2) 53

These are the same lazy dolts that call them selves "Software Engineer" yet don't know shit on how software actual works beyond an ID, don't understand software developer ethics, and think the can be sloppy because "computers have a lot of RAM" completely blind to the idea there janky ass software isn't the only thing running on a computer.

Modern IDEs have lead to this industry being full undisciplined half wits.

Slashdot Top Deals

Disobedience: The silver lining to the cloud of servitude. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...