Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you are highjacking a thread. Wanna trash the site's design, you should open a top level thread instead.
> Wanna trash the site's design, you should open a top level thread instead. Or better, don't[1]: Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
51–60 of 466 posts
Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#52So it sort of makes sense that companies would go on the attack because there's a risk that their insurance company will catch wind and they'll be on the hook.
Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there's any probabilistic analyser that could confirm that the article is generated, or show which parts might have been generated
Pangram[0] thinks the closing part is AI generated but the opening paragraphs are human. Certainly the closing paragraphs have a bit of an LLM flavor (a header titled "The Pattern", eg) [0] https://www.pangram.com
Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#54By the way, I had a story when I accidentally hacked an online portal in our school. It didn't go much and I was "caught" but anyways. This is how we learn to be more careful.
I believe in every single system like that it's fairly possible to find a vulnerability. Nobody cares about them and people that make those systems don't have enough skill to do it right. Data is going to be leaked. That's the unfortunate truth. It gets worse with the come of AI. Since it has zero understanding of what it is actually it will make mistakes that would cause more data leaks.
Even if you don't consider yourself as an evil person, would you still stay the same knowing real security vulnerability? Who knows. Some might take advantage. Some won't and still be punished for doing everything as the "textbook way".
Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#55Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#56Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> This is an LLM-generated article, for anyone who might wish to save the "15 min read" labelled at the top. Recounts an entirely plausible but possibly completely made up narrative of incompetent IT, and contains no real substance. Nothing in the original message refers to it being clickbait, the core complaint is the LLM-like tone and the lack of substance, which you also just threw it there without references iron…
[1] Unlike LLM-generated articles, posting LLM-generated comments is actually against the rules.
Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#58Since the author is apparently afraid to name the organisation in question, it seems the legal threats have worked perfectly.
There are only a few globally relevant diving insurers. DAN America is US based. DiveAssure is not Maltese. AquaMed is German. The one large diving insurer that is actually headquartered and registered in Malta is DAN Europe. Given that the organization is described as being registered in Malta and subject to Maltese supervisory processes, DAN Europe becomes the most plausible candidate based on structure and jurisdiction alone.
Re: I found a vulnerability. they found a lawyer
#59Since the author is apparently afraid to name the organisation in question, it seems the legal threats have worked perfectly.