201–210 of 307 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bonus points: kids need lego? Buy it without VAT. Write it off as a "client demo asset"
To write something off means you need revenue to offset. Revenue that would be taxed...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIF, way back when, Twitter was the "Twitter for tech nerds". Lots of water under the fridge since...
That's not how I remember it. Ever since the beginning circa 2008, it was the one site that was being pushed hard by the mainstream media, celebrities, and marketers. None of it was organic. All the tech nerds were on sites like Digg, old Reddit, or Slashdot.
Way back when is not when it broke mainstream. It's when the service started getting attention.
It was literally pitched as a "micro blog site" for techies to communicate news, and the "app" was 160 character SMS messages.
Nerds used it as a free (as in beer) way of sending alert SMS on server errors. (At least I did).
In 2008, twitter had already started to become mainstream, quickly shifting focus away from nerd interests.
Love it. AI as Responsibility Laundering. Like the gun that kills people rather than the murderer.
I don't know. Any of these criticisms can be applied on a case be case basis, but I think I would be justifiably upset if any of these happened: 1. my qBittorrent client pirated content without me intending it or taking any irresponsible actions that could reasonably be expected to cause it 2. my chatbot illegally infiltrated servers without me intending it or taking any irresponsible actions that could reasonably be…
> taking any irresponsible actions that could reasonably be expected to cause it
That latter part of the sentence is doing a lot of heavy lifting here
This resonates with me. The past few months, frontier AI labs were rushing to announce "no, our AI bot broke out of its sandbox and committed crime first and harder than yours". I said to so friends back then: if I posted about how I ran GLM 5.2 or whatever I was running then in some shoddily built sandbox and it escaped and accidentally hacked some US company, I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and…
> But when a hyperscaler does it, they just get inflated stock prices I also keep coming back to this, and I find it harder and harder a fact to live with. It's not a conspiracy theory, we're not crazy for pointing it out, and worse, there are people here I read about constantly what-abouting and number gaming and "well what would you have done?"ing like somehow the destruction of the concept of equal justice isn't j…
This resonates with me. The past few months, frontier AI labs were rushing to announce "no, our AI bot broke out of its sandbox and committed crime first and harder than yours". I said to so friends back then: if I posted about how I ran GLM 5.2 or whatever I was running then in some shoddily built sandbox and it escaped and accidentally hacked some US company, I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and…
> But when a hyperscaler does it, they just get inflated stock prices I also keep coming back to this, and I find it harder and harder a fact to live with. It's not a conspiracy theory, we're not crazy for pointing it out, and worse, there are people here I read about constantly what-abouting and number gaming and "well what would you have done?"ing like somehow the destruction of the concept of equal justice isn't j…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rookie mistake, you should have created a company and gotten people to do it. Put everything under the company. And then the one in trouble is the company not you.
What do you mean "in trouble"? We're literally seeing that stonks go up when crime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never understood how anybody would think this way. At work for example from day one of using AI our rule was, AI is just a tool and if you break something due to not reviewing the code properly etc. it's on you as if you wrote that code yourself.
Nobody ACTUALLY thinks this way, they just want to break all the laws and make their billions without any consequences. We've already seen the big ai labs turn around and cry foul when others try to use their content but they are happy to continue doing it themselves. The hypocrisy and willingness to play dumb are kind of staggering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
State actors, professional criminals will have same or better capabilities and do not hesitate to use them. On defense end we'll have only "pay bigcorp" option. OSS models can help to fix infra especially for folks who would never do it themselves. We do not know yet what final effect would be and it doesn't seem sky is falling now or in near future. "people dying and furry fanfics" is a scarecrow and distractor resp…
> State actors, professional criminals will have same or better capabilities State actors do but they are not unhinged enough to use this to cause massive loss of life, unlike random crazy people with access to a computer. Professional criminals don't have access. Please explain exactly how you expect a professional criminal to get access to a non-safety-tuned Astra/Fable equivalent. > OSS models can help to fix infr…
On bio: while it's easy to order all the raw material, there's the whole process of culturing bacteria/viruses/etc. that isn't trivial, and while a LLM might help in explaining stuff for rookies, there needs to be somebody physically working on it. It's not automatic. Once you get to this level, you'll find that any undergrad biologist or chemist can already make bio/chem weapons, and you don't see it happening. Terrorist groups already employ biologists or chemists that are supporters of their cause, no need for LLMs.
On cyber: aside of the question of why critical infrastructure is on the Internet on the first place (ah yes, lowest bidders, people not caring enough, business not giving IT/OT budget, S in IoT standing for security etc), if the available models can't handle cyber tasks, how can you defend yourself? See the HF "attack" that HF had to use GLM-5.2 to investigate what happened. This is the best argument for open models. Unless of course, you are the AI model creator or somebody they authorized to use their sanctioned model/harness and want to create a moat for their business.
This is FUD. Creation of business moats by fear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With AI, we give it the ability to do things. As we can give it this ability, we are responsible for what it does with that ability. LLMs are predictive models, and while we can expect things to go right, we know that things can also go wrong. As such, it is our responsibility to limit or sanitize their output. If you are the one giving unrestricted and unsanitized tool access to a large language model, then you are…
You gave the tree the ability to fall when you decided to plant it. It wouldn't have that ability if you didn't. And we already know that trees can fall, don't we? That doesn't make you inherently responsible for the tree falling down in a freak storm 3 decades down the line.
We can't find someone to blame for forces of nature. This includes an earthquake, tsunami, etc. Insurance can help recover from these events, but nobody is "responsible" for the events happening. This may or may not include healthy trees falling. LLMs are not a force of nature, and we can and do expect them to have erroneous output. We can and do assign responsibility to the humans who use LLMs. Again, they are not a force of nature. We control them, we give them the ability to do bad things, so it's pretty obvious that there would be responsibility and blame attached for when things go wrong.