331–340 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
nonsense on all levels. RMS has offered broadly solutions/alternatives since the beginning, along with reporting early on trends that other people ignore.
What is his solution to combatting botnets at scale?
I think this is the third HN link I've clicked on in a row that leads to an LLM-generated article. I'm not opposed to AI, but I'm tired of seeing it quietly substituted for human thought and expression.
I'm seeing this stance a lot "this is obviously AI generated" Why? What's LLM generated? How can you tell? To me what's obvious is that our trust system is already breaking down. Commenters accusing each other of being AIs is also another example of this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a fine line between harassment and pointing of for socially bad actions. Harassment involves usually calling by names, making threats etc. You can definitely shame people with a diplomatic language.
Why would anyone "feel uncomfortable opening their door, walking down the street" if they weren't being harassed? It sounds to me like you're trying to defend harassment. If that's not true, and you also believe people should not be harassed, it would be helpful if you stated so clearly and unambiguously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last time this happened we got a bunch of Google employees downplaying the impact of WEI and calling it a nothingburger, that people were being hysterical. I just checked, and everyone I saw defending it has since left the company. I'm sure another wave of Google managers, keen to appeal to the higher-ups, will be here to defend this new initiative any minute now.
This makes me curious, where did they go?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those don't prove that a human is present. A FIDO2 key can be automated by electronic relay. The only way to do this involves device attestation - locking devices down and utilizing hardcoded TPM/Secure Enclave esque chips. The best we can hope for would be an open standard for those chips so that people can use them with their own X.509 certificates that lets them choose their own CA.
Real hardware doesn't mean a human is present either, unfortunately. It just means that you have to spend on real devices to bypass these defences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those don't prove that a human is present. A FIDO2 key can be automated by electronic relay. The only way to do this involves device attestation - locking devices down and utilizing hardcoded TPM/Secure Enclave esque chips. The best we can hope for would be an open standard for those chips so that people can use them with their own X.509 certificates that lets them choose their own CA.
Real hardware doesn't mean a human is present either, unfortunately. It just means that you have to spend on real devices to bypass these defences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think identifies never need to be verified? Seems like a central function in operating an accountable society, hence birth certificates, passports, etc. There should not be a requirement to verify identity, but if a website owner only wants to provide access to their website to people with verified identities, why is that not their right?
> Do you think identifies never need to be verified? Seems like a central function in operating an accountable society, hence birth certificates, passports, etc. Verifying identity for specific services tied to your finances or body is a whole different topic. > if a website owner only wants to provide access to their website to people with verified identities, why is that not their right? I like the GDPR's general p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Regulate maximum model size. is it still 2023 in your reality? as for the rest of it: my brother in Christ, may I remind you that America is not the only country in the world, that it does not own the Internet, and that its laws do not apply anywhere else? passing heckin' wholesome laws in one country will make no difference whatsoever when people and companies from 194 other countries can access the Internet and do…
> is it still 2023 in your reality? No, it's 2026, years into a "break the law rapidly and make ourselves too big to regulate" strategy, and it needs dealing with. > may I remind you that America is not the only country in the world It's a good thing other countries are also able to regulate, and international treaties are a thing. It's also a good thing when things hill-climb towards improvement, even if they don't…
"international moratorium on AI research" is 2023 delusion also.
>Acting helpless or hopeless does not get things done. People saying it's impossible is a distraction from trying to get things done. Decide to win, rather than justifying why you're going to lose.
very well. what did you anti-AI go-getters have accomplished in the past three years?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> actually human generated Human written, not generated. > HN isn't popular enough to be invoked as a source Excuse me, what do you mean there? The author happens to read HN too.
>Excuse me, what do you mean there? The author happens to read HN too. Read the rest of the comment. It's not suspect because it's referencing HN, it's suspect because of the way it's referencing HN. Specifically, its use of the phrase " the HN thread", even though it wasn't mentioned before. Maybe it's a editing gaff, but it's also consistent with how an LLM would write if presented with a list of sources.