And pretty sure "Elite" means something different after the DOGE purge ...

Let’s see what DEI hire the administration puts in charge of this.

And Google possibly didn't care and thought if anyone complained it would be better for them to then ask for forgiveness than first ask and wait for permission, that they might not get. I hope they're fined *and* made to replace all the trees.

J'accuse martin-boundry !

The above post has tells of AI use (proper spelling and grammar -even paragraphs!)
You are hereby banned forevermore from the interwebs for suspicion of tech-heresy. /s

That it can be mistaken for AI then well, shit man I'm sorry.

That said AI is fundamentally plagiarism on demand. This means that the same tools that have been developed for a long long time for detecting plagiarism will work just fine. The real problem is people are assholes and they will accuse people of using AI to write stuff and people will join in because people are assholes.

The solution is to start discouraging people from being assholes. But that is a big lift because behind every asshole is our competitive culture. We really like to turn absolutely fucking everything into a goddamn competition. Nobody can have any fun unless they are either making a shitload of money from it or they are the absolute best at it. It's especially bad here in America where puritanical bullshit means that anything you do that isn't inherently valuable is a moral failing on your part.

Basically fix the actual problems in society and dumb little problems like this go away. But that requires change that I don't think anyone wants to make. A cooperative society would be better for everyone except a handful of assholes but well here we are

That's right, chum. Cutting down trees can bring the wolves down on a village.

When will these villains learn that actions have consequences?

Microsoft has probably the most illustrious history of bugs where just visiting a website or opening an email can get your system hacked, but you're right, this is not a problem unique to them.

These days, Lookout asks you before it loads any images from outside your organization...

But I saw something that only about 7% of data centers are failing to go through due to moratoriums and most of that 7% is a single project.

They're just ignoring us. If we tell them no they just keep building the data center.

American spent 50 years undermining democracy and dismantling our institutions. We can't expect them to save us or protect us now. We need to rebuild them and it's going to take decades. And we need to learn what a moral panic is and why we should ignore it

No. Per the Computer Fraud And Abuse Act, exceeding your authorization (even if you have legal access to a system) is a crime. Access and authorization are not the same thing.

Just because you can do a thing does not mean you have permission to do so.

a car analogy: Having a key to your former employers company truck does not mean you have authorization to take it for a drive. Even if they forgot to get the key back when you quit, that is still grand theft auto.

It is common for police officers who leave the force voluntarily to retain their data access credentials. For years. Decades in some cases. As long as they do not offend someone high-ranking, they keep their police access to search records. Quite a few Private Investigators go their whole career misusing former police access to databases.

Once an official credential is in the system, it is there until revoked -not until the officer leaves the force. The databases are not tied to an individual police force, and it is common for credentialed officers to move to another police force. Think of it like a security clearance -you need a reason to get one, but it can follow you to a new posting. There is not a well managed revocation process for police access credentials.

Yeah, and their whole argument is irrational. $1500/$30 = 50 months. A four-year ROI isnâ(TM)t irrational. Whatâ(TM)s irrational is companies expecting to make back their costs in a year, and expecting that because their service sucks so much that people wonâ(TM)t stay past the promotional period.

We should really be building operating systems with more process isolation and clear permissions systems for which apps can interact with which other apps in which ways. There's elements of this in Android, and in capabilities systems like selinux, but the more powerful they get the harder they are to use. This is inevitable, but a lot more can still be done to make this kind of functionality accessible to users.

Not even Python could keep up with having to update from Python 2 to Python 3.

They’ve spun a serious architectural and containment failure into a marketing triumph. Give a swarm of autonomous agents vast compute and web access, and the outcome isn't an eerie glimpse of emerging superintelligence—it’s just predictable, sloppy engineering dressed up as the first glimpse of an AI-driven economic singularity.

The spin makes sense when you look at management incentives: live like a king off of a speculative bubble. For their part, AI investors react to stories of the technology's apocalyptic potential the way a junkie reacts to warnings of fentanyl's potency: gimme some. Their game: to apply "move fast and break things" mantra to the economy as a whole, by obsoleting humans.

If the investors can own an AGI, the distinction between those who can do things and those who can't becomes irrelevant. The only distinction that would matter is between people who collect rent on the technology, and those who must pay that rent to live. AGI would destroy society as we know it, and whatever replaces it would be up for grabs — with people who own the technology dictating whatever follows. That's why they're spending so much money to build a post-scarcity economy. A post-scarcity economy is not necessarily an egalitarian one.

I don't think that scenario will actually happen: investors are projecting the immediate aftermath of a major advance in AI technology into something that can be transformed by brute force scaling into AGI. Remember: investors loved Theranos too — so much for the rational investment market.

But AI doesn't have to reach AGI to cause serious harm. The technology only needs to be ubiquitous, too behaviorally complex to predict, and too deeply integrated into everything we do. When it starts breaking things, the plan is for us to be too structurally dependent on AI to rein it in.

So far neither one has built a lunar lander yet, so, indeed, it's a good idea to wait before making a choice.

Beautiful pictures are fine and inspiring, but it's prudent to actually see some real hardware before committing.