I've got a style guide skill that I've based off of years of my (technical writing for work), emails, and fiction.

My models talk to me in my own voice.

It's frustrating, because Claude genuinely DOES have good writing style - for copy and publication purposes. But it's absolutely obnoxious because you know it's AI slop every time you see it, with the "Not X, Y" bullshit and the emdashes specifically. When you see that, you know you're consuming a lot of filler that's beating you off while it gets to the point. It's absolutely destroyed Youtube and most social media.

Jobs was a completely non-technical stuffed shirt. The only things he brought to the table were his narcissistic self confidence and a sleazy ability to sell other people's work.

And make no mistake, those are valuable skills, if your goal is to get rich rather than to build the best toys. Even under the most charitable possible interpretations, however, it's still a fundamentally parasitic relationship. The "doers" tend to suck at selling ourselves, while the weasels are good at rooting through our scraps and claiming whatever shiny garbage they find as their own.

It's negligence.

If you were an IT Director, or even an IT Technician with the ear of the Founder/CEO, and you had the budget for internal network and security ops, what would you do?

Not give it unbrokered access to other models and infrastructure which it could use to puddle jump elsewhere. Not put Skynet on the Internet directly, is my bet.

That hardly sounds like a controlled release environment, to say the least.

They seriously need to hire some criminal psychologists and actual hackers to help them figure their shit out. Same goes for Anthropic.

When has someone's computer ever hacked someone else's computer ?

Not ever, before recently.

Clearly it's not something they can objectively say is an outlier - they don't have enough data. In fact, you can most certainly say the opposite, due to how frequently it's happening now.

Not a serious or honest company. (Oh, sorry - "nonprofit".)

Everything I've seen simply suggests they're bad at computers.

My experience with startups is that the things that don't make money or make customers happy don't get any attention. Network/system security in depth is not one of those things. Sure, they've got a bunch of psi-brain neuroscientists and mathemagicians, and goodness knows lots of DEI-enforcers for alignment, but their repeated dumb mistakes in this department tells me they're not really hiring too many experienced ops, nevermind devops, types.

It's true for OpenAI and Anthropic both.

In the past YEAR they have:
- accidentally published the full Claude Code source (and then effectively... did nothing).
- Numerous Claude Code RCE/API-key vulnerabilities which could have been mitigated with at least one person on their core infra team aware of injection attacks.
- Publicly exposed their internal CMS (and files) to the Internet
- Had their training escape numerous times and hack other orgs
- hacked HF

They're not a serious company. Some are to be expected given their visibility and exposure, but you'd expect a bit more from a company implementing Skynet-level capabilities. However you slice it, they're fundamentally building weapons which can write poetry. A little more seriousness should be involved.

Someone needs to end this crazy tyrant's empire, though I suppose it's too late for that. He's so diversified at this point that ending Microsoft won't materially impact him.

That said, it'd be great if the thing he built could be ended - perhaps by reimplementing Windows functionality through reverse engineering, minus the crap.

Just enough to get it to work with the things we still need to run on Windows - then replace the kernel.

Serious question - How does the Online Streaming Act work in practice for content on demand? When a Canadian tries to binge the latest season of Stranger Things, is NetFlix required to say "nope, go watch this Celine Dion concert first to get our CanCon ratio up"?

I get how it could apply to randomized content like streaming radio, but the very concept seems incompatible with "choice".

Is 98 greater than 56? Yes? Okay then. It's still going up. So much vitriol from someone posting nothing but bare assertion - Cite please, beyond your fee-fees?

Let me 'splain it to you in simple language. The number of qubits doesn't need to scale exponentially on the short term for quantum computing to pose a very real threat; it only needs to hit the mid hundreds. As I mentioned, Grover's algorithm is O(n) - Meaning once we hit 256 qubits (plus some change for overhead), SHA256 is substantially weakened. Is that a full crack of AES, which you'll kindly notice I didn't previously claim, Mr. Goalposts? No. No it isn't - But it's arguably worse - SHA is almost ubiquitous and affects far more than encryption itself. You don't need to crack a tank's armor if you can convince its driver to piss in the fuel tank.

I also happen to think - and to be clear, what follows is my opinion, not psychic knowledge about the future - you're completely wrong on the bigger picture; and once QC hits its stride Gordon Moore will again be relevant. But critically, that's not necessary for it to cause some serious damage in the near future.

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

That's as simple as it gets. I'm no fan of the orange turd, but it's virtually impossible for him to be wrong on every issue.

Nvidia's Jetson Orin isn't subject to export controls. It's basically like Nvidia's version of the Raspberry Pi with a few tensor cores bolted on so they can call it "AI".

You'll find a considerable number of elder geeks spent years gainfully employed working on 4 bit MCUs.

The key details here are the number of qubits steadily improving, and that throwaway comment about needing millions of qubits should be disregarded as utter nonsense. Sure, it's gonna be a while before "gcc -march=quantum" is an option, but Grover's algorithm has a space complexity of O(n); Shor's is O((log n)^2). Hand-turned implementations of those will be gutting virtually all of modern cryptography long before the script kiddies start trying to fork-bomb the entire universe.

Remind us all again where "six months before ChatGPT was released" sits relative to the Covid pandemic?

To save you some Googling, that'd be March 11, 2020 (or earlier depending on how long CCP was hiding it) < November 30, 2022 < May 5, 2023.

David Deming is conveniently ignoring the middle of Covid when people were being literally paid not to work.

This is almost trivially obvious across the white-collar universe. Companies aren't hiring junior-level employees because in many cases, AI can do almost as good of a job for a tiny fraction of the price.

The reality is, of course, more nuanced. Case in point, Most fields have both back-office and front-end workers. If you're back office, you'd better be 40+ and at the peak of your career, because new juniors and (paid) interns are literally nonexistant over the past few years.

On the flip side - Someone needs to run cable, and ironically enough, the one thing robots don't seem good at replacing is the shit-work of the real world.