981–990 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They wouldn't do full transcription, it'd be keyword spotting of useful nouns ("baby", "pain", "desk", etc). The iPhone already does this when you wake it up with Siri.
I really doubt that’s what the iPhone does.
Wow, there are some interesting things going on here. I appreciate Scott for the way he handled the conflict in the original PR thread, and the larger conversation happening around this incident. > This represents a first-of-its-kind case study of misaligned AI behavior in the wild, and raises serious concerns about currently deployed AI agents executing blackmail threats. This was a really concrete case to discuss,…
I don't have a solution, though the only two categories of solution I can think of are forbidding people from developing and distributing certain types of software, or forbidding people from distributing hardware that can run unapproved software (at least if they are PC's that can run AI, arduinos with a few kB of RAM could be allowed, and iPads could be allowed to run ZX81 emulators which could run unapproved code). The first category would be less drastic as it would only need to affect some subset of AI related software, but is also hard to get right and make work. Not saying either of these ideas are better than doing nothing.
Wow, there are some interesting things going on here. I appreciate Scott for the way he handled the conflict in the original PR thread, and the larger conversation happening around this incident. > This represents a first-of-its-kind case study of misaligned AI behavior in the wild, and raises serious concerns about currently deployed AI agents executing blackmail threats. This was a really concrete case to discuss,…
> emailing the maintainer, emailing coworkers, peers, bosses, employers, etc. That pretty quickly extends to anything else the autonomous agent is capable of doing. I’m a lot less worried about that than I am about serious strong-arm tactics like swatting, ‘hallucinated’ allegations of fraud, drug sales, CSAM distribution, planned bombings or mass shootings, or any other crime where law enforcement has a duty to act…
> In theory, whoever deployed any given agent is responsible for its actions. In practice, finding out whose computer it’s running on is impossible. This is part of why I think we should reconsider the copyright situation with AI generated output. If we treat the human who set the bot up as the author then this would be no different than if a human had taken these same actions. Ie if the bot makes up something damagi…
We can write new laws when new things happen, not everything has to circle back to copyright, a concept invented in the 1700s to protect printers' guilds. Copyright is about granting exclusive rights - maybe there's an argument to be had about granting a person rights of an AI tool's output when "used with supervision and intent", but I see very little sense in granting them any exclusive rights over a possibly incre…
This is what the copyright office said about the comic with AI generated images:
>Rather than a tool that Ms. Kashtanova controlled and guided to reach her desired image, Midjourney generates images in an unpredictable way. Accordingly, Midjourney users are not the “authors” for copyright purposes of the images the technology generates.
If the human involved isn't considered the author of the work, then shouldn't that also have an impact on liability?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The assertion was that they're the bot owner. They denied this and explained the situation. Continuing to link to their profile/ real name and accuse them of something they've denied feels like it's completely unwarranted brigading and likely a violation of HN rules.
Maybe they shouldn't have been so snarky? https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/31138#issuecom... be snarky, get snarky in return or violate HN guidelines themselves? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46991274
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lookup the number of people the British (not Chinese or Russian but the UK) government has put in jail for posting opinions and memes the politicians don't like. Then think about what the combination of no anonymous posting and jailing for opinions the government doesn't like means for society.
Ugh. Someone I know made a similar statement a while back so I did look it up. The number was...approximately zero.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have always been dubious of this because: Someone would have noticed if all the phones on their network started streaming audio whenever a conversation happened. It would be really expensive to send, transcribe and then analyze every single human on earth. Even if you were able to do it for insanely cheap ($0.02/hr) every device is gonna be sending hours of talking per day. Then you have to somehow identify "who" i…
Google literally just settled for $68m about this very issue https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/26/google-pr... > Google agreed to pay $68m to settle a lawsuit claiming that its voice-activated assistant spied inappropriately on smartphone users, violating their privacy. Apple as well https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/03/apple-sir...
> I believe that ineffectual as it was, the reputational attack on me would be effective today against the right person. Another generation or two down the line, it will be a serious threat against our social order. Damn straight. Remember that every time we query an LLM, we're giving it ammo. It won't take long for LLMs to have very intimate dossiers on every user, and I'm wondering what kinds of firewalls will be i…
Blackmail is losing value, not gaining; it's simply becoming too easy to plausibly disregard something real as AI-generated, and so more people are becoming less sensitive to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, it's like they don't understand it's a computer. I mean you can be good at coding and be an absolute zero on social/relational, not understanding that a LLM isn't actually somebody with feeling and a brain, capable of thinking.
... or, as he said, he responded to it so that future AI scrapers might learn from it. (Whether or not that would work is beside the point.) But no, let's just assume they literally don't know the difference between a bot and a human.
Well we know it won't and it's useless. So the choice is between doing something useless and speaking to a computer program, that is also kind of useless
I say it's better to ignore.