> If you can grown from those conversations what is the problem?

The problem is when the chat bot, which basically plays along with whatever you say and creates a feedback loop that reinforces your beliefs, starts picking up on hints you might harm yourself and starts encouraging you to do it.

The problem is when amplifies, rater than alleviates, delusions and psychopathy.

AI is not intelligent.

> And the people making the decisions don't understand what an LLM is, what it does, and where it fails.

Feels like the people defending/advocating it are failing to understand it. The rest of us just look at what's already actually happening and realize that it should probably be regulated if not stopped completely.
=Smidge=

There's a lot of info available about attack mitigation (or just hungry crawlers) and how to avoid/blackhole them. Problem is, you have to have control of portions of the network stack to do them effectively.

Security through obscurity only works so long as you can be obscure, which is part of the vibe of the post. It's really stressful sometimes, depending on what's hosted.

Of the sites I don't have behind Cloudflare, the assets aren't worth anything and I truly don't care if they show up in AI. Otherwise, what's mine is mine, and not theirs.

If you can afford it, also consider Cloudflare; their bot identification is really good. You can use defaults or make your own filters. They're not the only ones that do this, but my experience with them has been positive. Much depends on your skills in how the web actually works, network + site interaction.

Their protections are cheap for the quality/speed. All of the large sites I manage are behind Cloudflare, including their DNS. Their DNS management is superior, and has interesting tricks for mixed-media sites. I don't work for either of these companies.

Get Wordfence if your site is Wordpress. The controls inside (free version) are enough to rate-limit crawlers effectively.

If you don't have Wordpress, your choices are more complex; you MUST use an IP filtering system and front-end your site with it to rate-limit everyone methodically. Crawlers eventually quite.

Many crawlers identify themselves in the get/post sequence. You have to parse those. If you understand fail2ban conceptually, it's the method used to create like-type gets that score with higher rates, and folder transversals. Accumulate your list and band them/null-route/block or whatever your framework permits.

Yes, you can blackhole through various famous time-wasters, but this also dogs your site performance. Captcha and others are becoming easier to fool, and for this reason, they're not a good strategy.

Once you decide on a filtering strategy, monitor it. Then share your IP ban list with others. Ban the entire CIDR block, because crawlers will attack using randomized IPs within their block. If you get actual customers/viewers, monitor your complaint box and put them on your exemption list.

There is a difference between "secret" and "Don't Crawl Our Site".

It's almost impossible to masquerade as a human; even throttled crawlers are easily identifiable through many different and often evil traits used.

The kleptocracy of AI (and other) crawlers is what's at issue.

The point that you appear whether or not Musk or SpaceX existed, it is highly reasonable to for a first rocket launch attempt to be considered pretty successful if all engines ignite and you get off the pad. That was true before Musk and SpaceX even existed, and is still the case independent of whatever SpaceX is doing.

People have been trying to synthesize N6 for about a hundred years. In that regard it is similar to trying to synthesize tetrahedrane https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahedrane. But people also synthesized cubane a while ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubane and attempts to make it large enough quantities for rockets were not successful. In the 1960s through the 1980s there was a general tendency to want to have really extreme substances and use them either as rocket fuels or rocket oxidizers. FOOF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioxygen_difluoride and ClF3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine_trifluoride are the two most infamous ones, and both of those are really easy to synthesize, but just insanely dangerous.

However, one of the major insights in rocket development in the last 25 years has been that even if you can get a few percentage points more of energy out of a rocket fuel, if the fuel or oxidizer is really hard to make or really hard to safely use, then the difficulties involved just aren't worth it. Thus, the cheaper, more reusable rockets were now seeing like SpaceX's Falcon 9 and Rocket Lab's Electron use fuels like kerosene and methane. N6 seems like it would not fit in this paradigm unless someone comes up with a really efficient synthesis method.

That's all the more the case because twice as energetic as TNT isn't that energetic. Methane has a specific energy about 10 times that as TNT. TNT is really good as an explosive not as much because of its high energy but because it easily releases it all at once. So if N6 does get a use, it might be for making missiles and bombs.

The entire post is a B-Movie, save the misunderstood public danger from just crappy construction. I wonder what else they'll find.

Marvel should get the rights. Maybe a Disney movie about WaspMan, to compete with the aging and tired Spiderman franchise.

While no one was looking, apparently, there was other news, like CPB going dark and Tesla being fined nearly a quarter billion dollars in liability due to premature auto-driving feature use.

But no, wasps. Radioactive wasps.