"AI-generated art doesn't receive copyrights" is an oversimplification with minimal legal precedent.

I may not agree with the rest of what you said, but this sums up AI etiquette nicely. Don't inflict your AI upon others. I don't want to read the AI's answer to a question I asked YOU! I especially don't want to do the code review and cleanup you thought was unnecessary.

It's ok to use AI to make your life easier, but never to make other peoples lives harder.

Who? Zuck and his sycophants? Won't help. Another piece of scum will float to the top.

"AI only finds simple to find bugs" is ignorance.

People have been saying the same things for many millennia about every new technology. History disagrees with your predictions.

Lots of folks are "empowered and amplified" but most don't go around debating with the shitbirds shitposting about how AI=bad. They are too busy working hard and creating. The finance side of AI is unquestionably bad, but the tech works and doesn't have any of the downsides the now unemployable constantly lament about.

This exploit targets IDEs, not AI. It's essentially the same old "autorun.inf" exploit from Windows 95 but updated for IDEs. You'll get infected with plain VS Code and no AI use at all. It also requires your system already be infected with node.js.

Companies wouldn't need massive compliance teams if they didn't pursue every single dark pattern they come across. This is like burglars complaining they need lookouts after being caught too many times.

That's the correct solution if you don't want people to find your stuff. Other folks are thinking bigger than you. Your comment adds nothing of value here because it's literally addressed in the summary: "...rather than each operator improvising its own survival plan in isolation."

Excel isn't open source. I know it's tradition to not read the article, and some people don't even read the summary, but now we're not even reading the headline?

Web development with a framework already has the problem constrained. You have to learn how to constrain the AI yourself when doing embedded or systems programming. It took me hundreds of hours and hundreds of dollars to get the hang of it.

I use it daily on embedded an unusual platforms. Works great if the docs are good.

Good for you. But I want my doctor well versed in medicine, not system administration.

Your analogy is shit. A cyberattack isn't "altering the deal", it's an error. If you rent a van and a third party vandalizes it to the point it won't function, nobody altered the rental agreement. Shit happens, and I'm sure Intoxalock has stuff like this in their contract because nobody can guarantee perfect cybersecurity.

My friend had one of these and it does all kinds of other things like taking photos of the driver performing the test. I can't remember everything he listed. Yes, someone fucked up the service, but this kind of device is supposed to failsafe with a disabled vehicle. It's not the same as a a car that gets over the air updates, which would failsafe with your vehicle continuing to run on old firmware. I'm pretty sure the over the air "periodic calibrations" they are talking about is the failsafe for tampering they want to keep obscure.

There's no timeline where these devices are not connected full time. Those of you who think otherwise are delusional.