The LitleLLM packages were comprimosed on Tuesday. The packages compromised today were telnyx 4.87.1 and 4.87.2. It's the same root cause: credentials exposed to a compromised version of Trivy earlier were used to make an unauthorized release of a compromised version of a different package.

> You can't fix it by "not letting stupid people breed", you have to fix it through not letting people become stupid

This sentence seems to be somewhat self contradictory. Despite decades of trying to make it not so, it seems that intelligence remains primarily inherited from parents/ancestors.

Socioeconomic status, education, opportunities, etc all have no ability to improve iq. Nutrition only matters in the sense of malnutrition. So environmental factors can reduce IQ, but they cant do anything to raise it.

Attempting to "fix" it, which we have been doing in the first world for a while now, seems to be causing average intelligence to drop precipitously. the peak IQ in most nations is now firmly in the past 30-70 years back. I think we just have to give up on the idea that this is something to "fix" per se, and let people make their own choices as individuals.

> The most important part which is wrong however is the idea that people who never contributed much would easily find economically equivalent work.

There is a name for that opinion: luddism.

Every single new technology shifts jobs and work, and every single time people fantasize about permanent structural unemployment, and every single time people just move into new types of work and there is no such thing as structural unemployment. Luddites back then could never imagine a world where less than 95% of people worked in agriculture, and today's neo luddites cant imagine a world without hordes of graphic artists, paralegal functionaries, music techs, and such, but its coming regardless.

Fundamentally, what people are willing to pay for always comes down to work done by others. Things that are automated, at best, shape how people work, and what work attracts more or less pay. Just as a shovel helps you to dig, a DNN helps you slop out boilerplate text with errors, so you dont need to pay as many people to do it.

These two fundamentals never change when a new tool or technology is used

* some people get more productive to some degree using the new tools
* That frees up labor to do new things, and the economy as a whole grows, because the new things have value

Its possible there will be a growing field of content curation; The DNN's & LLM's basically explode when their outputs are fed back their inputs. So instead of making tons of derivative works de novo, many creative types will instead become art critics; helping to curate an input set to train the machines that synthesize generated works.

paying taxes is also negative growth, so that part doesnt even matter.

The reason for "AI" causing zero gain is because its not "AI"; its not people, its not independent economic actors with agencies.

The name "AI" is nothing but a marketing gimmick, a lie.

What we have are just tools; helpers. And like any tool, the best they can be is productivity enhancers for people. But what these tools excel at is mostly economically unimportant work; shoddy art, boilerplate text, remixed music. So they make something with nearly no impact require fewer people.

Even if every single B-grade graphic artist, musician, and every contract and legal functionary gets put out of work by these babble generators, no real economic impact would be felt because those fields never contributed much, so the people freed from such work would quickly find economically equivalent work of any kind.

If there is to be any gain from the whole overinvestment bubble, it will be improved search engine answers. Like today, they will still be questionable, full of random errors, and politically slanted by the local jurisdiction. But they will be slightly better for what they are.Just like with search engines, people who are adept at prompting queries and filtering through the results will be slightly more productive than people who are not.

But it will take an awful long time for their meagre gain to measurably exceed the insane overinvestment lost in "AI".

If hardware doesnt run linux super well, the hardware is garbage. Simple as.

Until recently, you could get the text of national weather service guidance by telnet. It was about the right level of protocol to provide plain text to a terminal with enough information to paginate it and enough input to pick an airport code.

> There is no specific need for bitcoin in the world, it's a solution looking for a problem.

lol, it literally solves 100% of everything that is mechanically wrong with modern society.

Bitcoin, or something much like it, is the standing Great Filter test of our species.

We either progress into the next level of economic organization with a sound money network of some kind, or we devolve into an eternal stagnation and death.

We cannot have an anti-merit civilization, that is contrary to the basic precepts of evolutionary survival of the fittest.

Disconnecting the motivational network which organizes behavior from actual human performance will only ensure anti-survival behavior dominates until we are all dead.

We can hope its bitcoin, so that it can happen in our lifetimes. Perhaps some future innovation will be much the same, and restore the social value network to a semblance of order in some distant future.

Until then, we are doomed to repeat cycles of war, civil unrest, boom and bust cycles, and ever increasing wealth inequality. Pollution and waste will increase astronomically with no correction. Things we used to do easily, such as building bridges or other infrastructure, will become increasingly untenable, and our environment will decay around us. The oceans will be full of the decaying monuments of wind turbines, lush valleys will be full of heavy metals from broken solar cells, the ocean will be a soup of plastics and garbage, and the land will be a version of "idocracy" with a species seemingly evolving back into an apelike existence.

That works at some intersections. At others, buildings and echoes make it pretty much impossible to tell if the siren you hear is an emergency vehicle about to cross the intersection in front of you where you have a green light, or there's some emergency somewhere else, which is often true. They could still go through red lights, but not at full speed. With the new system, they find that the light is green for them at every intersection, and they don't have to slow down.

> If markets decided today that Bitcoin was a more desirable currency than the Dollar, we would be wiping our asses with the Dollar by mid-day today.

That is the bitcoin game-theoretical endgame.

The dollar system has a ton of momentum, so it might not be quite so fast a transition as you think. People dont have a hive mind and dont all decide everything at once.

A ton of economics comes down to peoples memories of the past impacting their present actions. The only reason people accept dollar prices or values of things today is because they remember recent past prices. All prices are "sticky prices", all wages are "sticky wages". So even if some large contingent of people decided they no longer value the dollar network, it would still have value derived from the people who do value it.

If bitcoin continues to survive, and slowly appreciate vs the dollar network, a breaking point may come wherein that effect accelerates. Money systems follow the "network effect", and so long as bitcoin is not fading towards zero value/use, it remains a contender for a network flipover.

> There is nothing inherently valuable in any currency. Not gold, Dollars, Bitcoin, teeth, or anything else. All currency is printed out of thin air (yes, gold too). Today's currency is tomorrow's toilet paper.

Not quite correct; while no system has "inherent money value" which is fully created by human social behaviors, money system do in fact have attributes and qualities which affect how they do function as money networks.

Gold has a more limited supply, but it is slow to validate and extremely slow to transmit.

The dollar system is quicker to validate and transmit, but has a rapidly growing supply which devalues it against itself.

Bitcoin is a historical first: more transmissible and speed greater than the dollar network, combined with an absolute supply cap even more rigid than that of gold.

Those properties are strong enough to keep it in existence despite the network effect of the dollar. Really the only move the dollar system could make to fight back would be an extended period of non-inflation. That would allow the network effect to re-assert itself by removing bitcoins primary advantage.

It is unlikely the dollar system could sustain a large period of non-expansion, but a short burst of extreme deflation might have a similar effect. If neither of those two things happens, bitcoin will continue to slowly appreciate, eventually leading towards some kind of end-game scenario

I still dont understand why people got so bought-in to this "AI" boom, and the insane levels of over-investment with no horizon of return.

Yes its neat stuff.... some mild improvements in machine translation. Some big improvements in word salad and image salad generation... assuming you dont re-use the outputs as inputs, and have a use for such scraps. some mild improvements in pattern recognizes. And thats out it.

Why didnt people lose their minds for OCR or spell-checkers, which are similar levels of technological progress. This is arguably less important. Maybe the biggest impact of this stuff is going to be smaller development teams do a little more, with fewer artists. They can spam out a song, movie, or a game without hiring any artists maybe, so long as they dont mind quirky inconsistencies. They can even use it as a quick reference manual - its pretty good at being a stack-overflow type development aid... if used judiciously. Using it for real dev can be mixed gains; reviewing the code it writes for bugs is often slower than just writing it from scratch, but its nice to get a second POV especially when working in unfamiliar apis. It can also help spit out unimportant glue code, like visualizers, that dont have to be perfect.

Its probably the magic word "AI" which deep neural nets and large language models are very decidedly not. They are not alive, they dont think grow and learn. They are digital kitchen colenders, not living skynet robots.

The final paycheck is a 10% improvement in programmer efficiency, 15% improvement online search, and a 75% reduction in digital artists (the cases where imperfection is okay, non-artists can use it to push out something "good enough"). And that last bit might be temporary; eventually when 99% of all input samples came out of some deep neural net there just wont be any safe inputs to use, and the need for human artists to evolve things will rearise.

I think what you think of as recipients resenting handouts is commonly misunderstood. People have a basic need to feel like they are doing something worthwhile, which is traditionally fulfilled by them having jobs that pay them an amount that indicates how much other people value the work. Telling people they need handouts, then, indicates that they aren't capable of doing meaningful work. On the other hand, if people see that their work is valuable to people who can't afford to pay them a living wage (for example, daycare providers for retail workers who are parents), they're much more willing for somebody else to provide the money. UBI also helps the perception, in that there's no implication that recipients aren't also capable of getting paid for their work, since it's universal, and that frees people to look for things to do that they personally value but may not have built-in funding.

Of course, none of this helps if no occupations people can do are worthwhile any more because AI just does it better. You still have to worry about a high rate of idleness, even if the people aren't broke, but that's a somewhat different problem.

My favorite bug was when they started using message-signaled interrupts. When enabling MSI, they didn't disable the traditional IRQ, and my machine would keep delivering it. In particular, the network card would do something to toggle the IRQ line whenever a packet came in, but would leave the line triggered when idle. If this persisted for five minutes, the kernel would decide that line was stuck and mask it, but it was shared with my hard drive, whose driver would then never find out that operations had completed. Very odd to debug a computer that would fail if you left it alone too long, and nothing suggested that the network card was using that IRQ once it was configured to use MSI instead.

The fun part was that other people had machines where disabling the IRQ would also disable the MSI, so my fix broke other motherboards, and the PCI standard said something that could be interpreted as requiring either behavior. Fortunately, there was something you could check about the manufacturer to decide what to expect.

Applications which required getting mRNA into particular cells had problems with delivery, unless those cells were in the liver where everything tends to end up eventually. But getting cells in muscles in one arm to present antigens of a respiratory disease turns out to be fine for producing an immune response to the disease when it shows up in the lungs, so delivery isn't an issue for vaccines. This was known at the time of the article, but all the diseases with known proteins that would make good antigens already had approved vaccines, and nobody really wanted to develop a flu vaccine technology that wasn't more effective and just didn't take all summer to grow after settling on a strain. Then COVID showed up, and the ability to produce a vaccine knowing just the antigen and do it fast was suddenly important.

For that matter, this year it would be useful to be able to change the flu vaccine between Thanksgiving and New Years, because they picked the wrong H3N2 in the spring, but we don't have a suitable regulatory framework for approving that change, even though it's easy to make with mRNA.

The decision to do it was made in 2011, and they've been building the parts that will go into it, and they'd already committed to doing the installation at the end of the current operating period, but the schedule for ending that period is "mid-2026", so he gets to be the one who makes that date exact, with people hoping to get one last experiment that doesn't need the upgrade in before they have to wait a long time.

That's what a kernel developer told me when I reported this problem. In particular, they said I had a machine with an nVidia device that was different from all the similar devices they'd seen in not having the second copy engine actually function. They gave me one line of config for my PCI ID, and then it worked perfectly.

They found and fixed the issue immediately upon seeing logs from my machine, but they'd never seen exactly that issue before to know in advance that it was a possibility.