Imagine how irate Trump would be if someone did this to him -- or even half the stuff he does to others.

DoomSQLing :-)

We now live in a fully connected world where most users are connected through web browsers and are the intended victims.

This particular story is an exception to that. Remote software, accessed through a web browser, normally does not have read/write access to your local filesystem. But people are granting local filesystem access to proprietary AI services.

I think that granting such access is .. wow. I wouldn't do it, though I can see how if you use a specialized account for it, and if you're confident that your OS has no local user priv escalation bugs, it might be ok. In your sandbox you trust.

But GP's comment is about whose decision that is. If you use Linux, then it's your decision. If you use iOS, then it's Apple's decision. And MacOS is becoming less Linuxy and more iOSy every year. I think it makes plenty of sense for stories like this to result in people dumping MacOS for Linux. (But daaamn, their values surprise me. You wanna make your computer less secure instead of more? Oh well, like Rumsfeld said, freedom is untidy!)

No, if the state were renamed, it would be to Old America. NM might not be the true original, but if you look at it through the eyes of European colonization and continuous governance, then New Mexico has the best claim of the fifty. (Though if you take a less racist view, then I guess Alaska had the real OGs.)

Randi McGinn, a lawyer for New Mexico, said applying the full $5,000 penalty to the number of violations would create too large of a penalty under the US Constitution's protections on due process.

I ass/u/me this refers to the Eighth Amendment, but I don't remember seeing any monetary constants encoded within that text.

Google's telling me Meta is worth about $1.8 trillion so how would a mere $40B be "excessive?" It's only about 2% of their worth! Civil penalties in excess of 2% of someone's worth are routinely accepted as constitutional, aren't they? If this case were about me driving drunk and killing a whole family, I bet no one would flinch at the 8A implications of taking 2% (!?!) of my assets, and everyone would laugh at my lawyer if he brought up 8A for such an insignificant fine.

I understand why we have 8A, and everyone deserves mercy, but I don't see why Meta deserves exceptional mercy as a singular special case that we would be horrified to see applied anywhere else. Bringing up 8A for such a tiny fine would be giving Meta a very unique carve-out that we normally would not apply.

It may be that $5k is too much to charge criminals per act, in that each crime didn't really cause that much loss, but bringing up due process concerns seems like bullshit when the fine is already so small. NM and Meta had been trying to negotiate the cost of illegal business for years before negotiations failed and it went to trial. Meta decided to let a jury decide, and the jury's come up with a fairly tiny fraction of their assets.

If Meta thinks the price of illegal business is still too high, then they can lower the number of willful violations they commit per year, to optimize the advantage they gain from illegal actions at an affordable rate.

Geez, Zuck, just do less of it. If $40B seems like a lot, then maybe try only $10B worth of crime next time. What's the big deal? Live and learn. After this little fine you still have 98% of the company left to go on and incur the next wave of liabilities.

Along those lines, Paramount owns Comedy Central, which airs South Park, which has a $1.5B 5-year streaming contract with Paramount -- and South Park (now, South America) is regularly trashing Trump, the GOP, billionaires and data centers -- along with pretty much anyone else, even liberals, who deserve it ... Sure, Paramount and Ellison will probably make money airing SP, but it shows where their real priorities are. Trump and MAGA are just a means to an end.

south park paramount deal

Like a Streisand-bot effect? :-)

Ya, I'm wondering if these "rogue" AI Agents are more of a feature than bug.
The longer this goes on the less plausible any deniability becomes.

He would be serving time.

Why hasn't Sam Altman been arrested yet?
Why is OpenAI allowed to continue to operate?
Clearly it's a criminal organization.

Honestly... Since when reshuffling in a company's upper management is of any interest to anybody other than the people working for that individual at that company?

What next? They're gonna replace Bob at accounting because he didn't use AI to format his Excel sheets?

I heard J.J. Abrams is working on this, even though he hasn't studied any other waves. :-)

"They want children."

No, they don't. Read https://www.bps.org.uk/psychol...

Why would an adult wants to spend A LOT of time with a three, or even thirteen, year old? No one does that with children that aren't their own, for a reason.

The ideology is that people should be free to do whatever the want to as long as they don't limit other people from utilise the same level of freedom. No one is "proponenting" capitliasm, because telling other people what they should do with their freedom of contract right collides with "free ideology".

But they *are* taking care of people - those with net worths over $1B.

Actually it's now SI, so that would be super intelligent Super Intelligence. /s

(Or, as our President will eventually re-name it, "Super-Duper Intelligence" - *sigh*)