OK. I understand how you misunderstand the issue better now. You haven't thought about how time works. Is knowing meant fixing and deploying those fixes immediately then the advantage would go to the guys guys. It takes time to implement fixes and test them. Even if the fix was immediate there is a propagation issue. Patches don't roll out immediately and the landscape is huge. A vulnerability in an older version will not be treated as a priority. Sometimes patches don't make their way to production at all. Knowing doesn't fix the problem it only exposes it. Give all of this some more thought. You seem at least smart enough to see what you are missing as you perform further analysis if you do.

I get that you don't know very much about the situation and feel qualified to comment on Slashdot as though you are an expert anyway. It has been the Slashdot way for the decades I have been here. However your speculation, as indicated by your use of words like probably, give you away. While it is obviously true that *some* of these vulnerabilities are known to *some* bad actors, it is equally obvious to anyone who stops to think and be honest with themselves for even a short time that *all* of these were not known to *all* of them. Let that sink in. Now add to that the fact that *many* of these were not known to *anyone* and perhaps you can start to get a small grasp on the gravity of the change in landscape and it's danger. Claiming there is no danger and it is all just hype is so absurd I can't even think of words that express exactly how absurd.

So American nuclear weapons aren't dangerous because China also has nuclear weapons. Exactly the kind of reasoning I would expect from an AC I suppose.

I know you are but what am I? Herp Derp.

You have the posting algorithm wrong as usual. The algorithm is education and research first, insightful post later, not ignorant post first, then pretend to be an expert.

Yes. Finding flaws is a "stunt" ... much in the same way that you posting stupid comments is one.

So you believe that Mythos hasn't been finding vulnerabilities that have existed in code for years, and in some cases decades? Or is it that you just don't think that bad actors who have access to this information before the code has been patched and the fixes have propagated throughout the systems represents a danger? Conspiracies exist, but everything isn't a conspiracy. If you had actually done any research at all you would know how ridiculous you are to claim that AI models are not dangerous, and becoming more so exponentially, is absurd.

We know it but those politicians affected by the southern temperatures can't fathom the importance of fixing our CO2 output.

So what is the water equivalent of the sharp front edge of a cybertruck?

It's taking shape: Basic life may actually be quite common. Naked apes typing on keyboards on a digital network they built themselves not so much.

The rare earth and rare advanced intelligent life theories just got some extra weight.

... in Europe is roughly 5 degrees centigrade above worst case scenarios projected for the year 2050 back in 2016. Germany will likely crack the 40 degree mark in multiple locations at the end of this week. Once again a new heat record. I personally expect this to only get more intense in the next years until perhaps the gulf stream completely shuts down.

These are cascading effects kicking in and ramping up. It wouldn't stop if the planet went net-zero carbon tomorrow. So we're pretty f*cked, as predicted ever since 1970. I'm curious how hard though. Guess we'll find out soon.

... in some parts, contains bucketloads of over-the-top excess trivia in others and has sections that are flat-out provably false. If the sections chiefs don't think an article is important, they delete it. That's why poets important to the development of a language and culture sometimes don't even have an entry, let alone more that 3 lines while some third-grade rapper that made some noise 10 years back has an essay with 10 000 words covering every detail of their private life.

I've seen flat-out bullshit on wikipedia more than once, I've corrected some things, roughly 30% get rolled back. If an area of expertise has asshole/dimwitt chief editors (or whatever they are called in wikipedia-speak) I often just give up and don't bother.

Wikipedia is a reflection of our times and what's important to us. And it should be viewed as such. With a pound of salt.

... won't be spared. I'm down 20k from my last salary and with AI my productivity has risen 5x. On to of that, the processes I was supposed to automate with code are getting replaced by AI themselves.

Prepare for incoming.

... to my AI metasubscription now. AI does what I ask it to do, I just review the changes and commit. It's like having a personal team of 10-20 experts sitting in a chat just ready to do my bidding. It's not sitting but it doesn't feel like that too often yet.

However it's quite staggering to watch am AI so your job an order of magnitude better than yourself. And that for a bunch of software stacks a human couldn't dream to comprehend. It's also sobering to watch the value-add chains I'm supposed to automate with code being voided entirely by AI. Not only is my job gone, the context with which it makes sense is also rapidly vanishing. You should see the look on the face of the lawyers I work with when the realize how AI does away with them too.

I'm very likely going to leave my current team. I'm in the process of leaving classic Web software development as a day job. ... You guys can't imagine how glad I am not having just software and the Web as my only field of experience and expertise.