Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Faark's commentslogin

Oh we are on HN, just usually don't comment.

This made me laugh more that it should have. Thanks!

I feel like I'm certainly in that club as well.


He had enough proof, his own students, who assumingly agreed. And in case the company still pretends there is no problem you could still crawl their entire user base...

Also consent.

Wait for the other person to do so willingly seems kinda good advice in many areas.


Making predictions on how it will turn out VS designing how it should be. Up til now, powerful people needed lots and lots of other humans to sustain their power&life. Thus that dependency gave the masses leverage. Now I'd like a society we're everyone is valued for being human and stuff. With democracies we got quite far in that direction. Attempts to go even further... Let's just say "didn't work out". And right now, especially in the US, the societal system seems to go back to "power" instead rules.

Yeah, I see a bleak future ahead. Guess that's life, after all.


> didn't work out

In the "learn to love democracy and freedom" sense, sure, but in the economic sense? "Didn't work out" feels like a talking point stuck in 1991. Time has passed, China is the #2 economy in the world, #1 if you pick a metric that emphasizes material or looks to the future. How did they get there? By paying the private owners of our economy to sell our manufacturing base to them piece by piece -- which the private owners were both entitled and incentivized to do by the fundamental principles of capitalism. The ending hasn't been written, but it smells like the lead-up to a reversal in fortune.

As for our internal balance of power, we've been here before, and the timeline conveniently lines up to almost exactly 100 years ago. I'm hoping for another Roosevelt. It wasn't easy then, it won't be easy now, but I do think it's fundamentally possible.


What's the solution then? Chain 2 AIs, the first one is fine tuned on / has RAG access to your content telling a second that actually produces content what files are relevant (and logged)?

Or just a system prompt "log where all the info comes from"...


Someone please confirm my idea (or remedy my ignorance) about this rule of thumb:

Don't train a model on sensitive info, if there will ever be a need for authZ more granular than implied by access to that model. IOW, given a user's ability to interact w/ a model, assume that everything it was trained on is visible to that user.


You forgot c) real but won't be looked at by understaffed police agencies


HellCopter in my case. Few years ago I still somehow manages to get some edition running, no luck this time. Rot is a thing and the retro gaming & archival communities a blessing.


The good old "we don't serve gays" argument.

The baker case I think was about the cake, thus having to produce "reprehensible" art. Editorial work (steam selecting what games to promote) is Sth I strongly think is their right to choose. But having a transaction run through your network? That's on the other side of the spectrum, way closer to the "no gay customer" situation. If they'd at least pretend it's because of, idk, higher card fraud rates...


It will! Just yesterday had it run

> git reset --hard HEAD~1

After it commited some unrelated files and telling it to fix it.

Am enough of a dev to look up some dangling heads, thankfully


There are tones of non-obvious options. Eg make it appear like being shoot-downs. With a bunch of RNG / logic to make it non-obvious... random percentage, only when getting close to target, so many ways...

The real enemy is QA. Don't want it misbehaving during a virtual test flight.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: