deleted by creator

deleted by creator

They’re bugs. Major ones. Fundamental flaws in the program. People with a vested interest in “AI” rebranded them as hallucinations in order to downplay the fact that they have a major bug in their software and they have no fucking clue how to fix it.

The above comment has also been consumed by AI for training purposes.

Addicting maybe but they literally are not drugs. More akin to gambling addiction then any sort of drug dependency. There’s a gigantic difference between the two. Sort of bothers me when people throw them in the same pile as they are so much different when it comes to how to deal with those types of addiction.

Diablo Immortal entered the chat.

You mean Linksys, not Cisco. Cisco sold Linksys to Belkin, now Foxconn, like over a decade ago. I think it’s a pretty important distinction considering Cisco is enterprise focused and linksys is more home/consumer focused.

Why would you need to defend yourself for ordering a pizza and being shocked by the high price? Sometimes I think I’ve gotten too old for the internet. People should be allowed to order a pizza every once in a while and not have to formulate a 5 point list of the reasons why it’s okay for them to order pizza.

I just can’t even begin to reckon that view. I know he pulled back on it (see his quote I posted elsewhere), but aside from a child’s inability to consent, there’s a gigantic power disparity between an adult and a child. I just don’t get the logic on its very face. There’s no child out there that has the world experience to understand what is happening in that sort of situation.

If anything it’s just a gross oversimplification akin to a spherical cow in a vacuum (ie Assume a child with an adult brain, with world experience of an adult, and has the same relationship power as the adult. Also assume the adult that that is perfectly altruistic, has no alternative motives, and truly cares for the child on the same level as an adult relationship). It’s just so far beyond any real world scenario that I struggle to see how you could even logically come to the conclusion that it’s okay.

Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it," Stallman wrote. "Through personal conversations in recent years, I’ve learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per [sic] psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should not do that. I am grateful for the conversations that enabled me to understand why.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/03/richard-stallman-returns-to-fsf-18-months-after-controversial-rape-comments/

Took me a bit to find, but also he talks about how the Minsky scandal was a-okay in that same article. So maybe I should say he mildly changed course instead of pulling a 180. Still a strange opinion to hold.

Didn’t he kind of pull a 180 on those VERY questionable views? Not even trying to refute that he is not right about everything, as that’s just silly, but I’m pretty sure he pulled back on that particular extremely dumb opinion.

Yeah totally that’s why I said they were basically morally corrupt and used them as an example of smart people doing bad things… Maybe your judgement is a bit clouded?

I can just imagine you sitting there with a little astronaut helmet on, eating astronaut ice cream, and drinking Tang while watching the Challenger go up. Just slowly taking off your helmet, pouring out your tang, and chunking the astronaut ice cream in the dumpster. Then little InternetUser2012 just kind of saying to themself, “Yeah I don’t know what I was thinking. That shit is WAY more dangerous than I thought!”

In fairness, just reading about the Challenger also made me do about the same thing when I was a kid. I thought going to space was about the coolest thing I could think of to do. Then when I was in the like the 3rd or 4th grade I read about the Challenger and was like, “On second thought, I don’t think I want to go to space after all.”

Gates is insanely intelligent, like demonstratably so. Musk and Bezos are also very highly intelligent people. Do they have terrible, awful, even downright despicable views? Absolutely. But don’t be fooled, all three of those people are incredibly smart with actual high IQs (not in the braggart, “I have a very high IQ.” sense either).

Intelligence doesn’t translate to empathy or wisdom. Some of the least book smart people I’ve met have been profoundly wise at times, and some of those same people were incredibly empathetic. Unfortunately, I think all three of those people (Musk, Bezos, and Gates) are lacking in those traits, but saying they aren’t in fact measurably intelligent is only fooling yourself.

I say this as someone who was raised by a measurably very highly intelligent person who could be, and was, a complete monster at times, and had some really twisted views on the world/other people. Lucky for me I didn’t inherit that innate Intelligence I guess!

For a real answer here’s the Zscaler blog write up: https://www.zscaler.com/blogs/security-research/technical-analysis-anatsa-campaigns-android-banking-malware-active-google

It looks like they are doing it after app install with a malicious patch. This patch asks for SMS and accessibility access to gain privileges necessary to get into the banking apps. I haven’t thoroughly read it but just looking at the attack chain that’s what I gleaned.

Why reach for a fictional example when so many real world examples exist? Just curious because I think of Bezos, Musk, and to a lesser degree Gates as examples of smart people doing bad things. I mean there’s several very smart people that have done good things as well but those are harder to come by. Even people like Alfred Nobel created something he thought would save the lives of miners only for his invention to be used for war. Einstein also did a lot for the advancement of theoretical physics and his work was subsequently used as the foundation of the atomic bomb. It’s actually way harder to come up with a Tony Stark type smart “good guy” in the real world for me because reality is often far more grey.

That’s a completely different argument…

This is such weird logic. The Foo Fighters are millionaires that have a ton of leeway with what shows they do because they don’t really need more money to survive. The guy that frames houses probably isn’t working for a morally great company but that dude starves without the job.

Bands who break through walls with speakers

Not just try to sell you sneakers

You want bands who wanna sell you things

Or bands who wanna tell you things?

• Jeffery Lewis and the Rain, WWPRD

One of the last punk dudes still making a statement instead of doing shows for 50 year old execs.

Anyone aware if they are also getting data from their slack for government offering? I was looking at the govslack site and I can’t tell one way or the other. While they claim to meet most of the big compliance regs I don’t see anything about training AI being included/excluded.

I know that stealing trade secrets is a concern but seems like stealing state secrets might have some other implications. I know you’re not supposed to talk on slack about any classified info, but that doesn’t mean that sensitive info isn’t shared which also has some rather profound implications as well.