11–20 of 56 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you consider blind SQL injection an attack? If a user is not meant to have access to information, but they can somehow access it, that is a vulnerability.
Sure, except the information here is not other users' account info or something, it's analogous to the source of the DBMS. Which is not typically considered sensitive.
The implications of this sentiment are disturbing. It is considered an "attack" to probe at something to understand how it works in detail. In other words, how basically all natural science is done. What the fuck has this world turned into?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you consider blind SQL injection an attack? If a user is not meant to have access to information, but they can somehow access it, that is a vulnerability.
Sure, except the information here is not other users' account info or something, it's analogous to the source of the DBMS. Which is not typically considered sensitive.
Note: Google did not release the hidden dimension for GPT-3.5, and OpenAI has already implemented mitigations against some of this.
Google?
Note: Google did not release the hidden dimension for GPT-3.5, and OpenAI has already implemented mitigations against some of this.
> Google did not release the hidden dimension for GPT-3.5 Google?
The implications of this sentiment are disturbing. It is considered an "attack" to probe at something to understand how it works in detail. In other words, how basically all natural science is done. What the fuck has this world turned into?
OpenAI has blatantly said that the "open" in their name was a deceptive marketing ploy. At this point in time, they aren't interested in sharing much if any real research, and trying to discover this information is now an "attack" against them.