The problem about AI censorship is that, you can't preform bans without also create privileges at the same time. Sure, you can censor your AI to provide a "safe" version to the public, but someone will have the access/privilege to the uncensored version.
What stops the CEOs or even employees of the AI firms from creating something harmful such as WMDs etc themselves? They almost definitely already have that access. And this is not a zero-possibility thing, given how some of the top CEOs has preformed these years. Remember that one guy who did a \o salute in public, and the private island thing?
If Americans don't like Chinese AI, all cool. But then maybe they should start true open AI companies to build for the betterment of mankind instead of letting these few for-profit CEOs daily yelling nonsensical lies to cover those profit-seeking sinister asses.
// Before template expansion, .git was removed so that a fresh repo can be initialized; remove it again in case
// some template variable usage has conflicted with this directory and impacts git operations.
if err := root.RemoveAll(".git"); err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("unable to remove .git folder")
}
Why the `err` isn't carried by the error message? For security? Then maybe log it internally?
User/operator can't really fix the problem if you keep giving them information this vague.
If I may guess, given how delicate chem or bio weapons are, even if AI can lay out a method to create one, the first thing the weapon would destroy is likely it's creator(s).
Of course, with the exception that such weapon is created by organized crime groups, such as drug cartels such.
Probably don't worry nation states tho, these guys already got way worse things in their warehouses than what individual baddies could ever imagine.
Speak of that, I'm kinda surprised not one Full Self-Driving enabled Tesla has ever sneak out of their owner's locked garage to rob a bank or something.
Wonder what's up with the GNUnet (https://www.gnunet.org). Apparently there's still activity on it's development, but I didn't see adaptation/integration, even in free software like Linux. Sure it's not 1.0 yet, but the open source world is filled with sub 1.0 software that works great.
A stable online identify is important, that's maybe why you rent those domains etc. But after rent and forego quite a few, I slowly realized that domain at it's current format isn't a stable presence, instead it's more like branding instead of an identify. If an identify can be operated by different people without it's previous operator agreeing, is it truly an identify?
But I do need an identify, always under my control as much as possible, so people can trust the content and service running on it without having to guess if it's still me operating it.
Gnunet was and is incredibly advanced technology, solving many problems better than most p2p systems that came after, who never bothered to even look at those ideas, and implemented worse concepts from scratch (IPFS, veilid, libp2p...) However, it is exclusively academic, and the authors let themselves be distracted too much. The system was mainly developed by grad students who mostly leave after they have completed a barely working proof of concept for their thesis.
It never had enough functionality running smoothly enough to attract a meaningful community, which would have been a prerequisite for a p2p network. It is so sad.
They made it sound like it, but this is not a victory at all, this is a temporary strategic compromise to silence the most sensitive/foreseen privacy advocator for now. But they will not stop here, instead they'll keep advancing the mechanisms, opinions and laws, so one day when the pieces aligned, they can come back to turn this tap off while having people lied to their side.
Forced age verification needs to be abolished completely and people who advocated for it punished to the point that their political career ends, this should be the baseline.
But of course, based on my understanding of everything, no, nobody will do anything effective against it. Everyone will just be "Yeah... they forced a component on my system that could act as spyware to monitor me, then have me pay for it without give me any control. But guess what, I will accept it because they said it's good for the future of mankind", like a peasant would. This is the tax you paid ended up for you, you know?
California making this law is but one domino, but if you can't or won't see the bigger picture of the cascade of dominos, then yes, you are the naive one. And there is a need to comment with guns ablazin', this is existential for humanity on a long enough time horizon.
This should be the top comment (minus the first line which, while not untrue, probably doesn't help the message)
We need solidarity to push back against this.
The corporate and government systems we have built are the original paperclip maximizers.
They/collectively "we" are creating an enclosure around all of humanity... Systematically eliminating privacy, liberty and freedom.
Increasingly, the matrix has all of us, and it didn't even need to put us in scifi stasis pods - turns out fiat currency + inflation/infinite growth + resource scarcity + digital markets + internet + smartphones/IoT/devices is already a pretty effective matrix substrate..
Not sure if it's just me, but I started really dislike the "tech product" these days.
You bought this TV and it might install malware on your computer, so to use it you also have to buy a blocker that might be a scam. Where is the joy in all of this?
My X.com was shadowbanned, I got tired trying to resolve it, so I made the ban permanent with a simple element `.click` against the Like button of one of my post done inside a very quick `window.setInterval`. One of the best decision I ever made during the past few years.
I'm also in the process of getting my Steam account deleted because my friend told me it has been flagged while all I did was just using it as I would normally, no hacking, no cheating etc, paying all with my own money instead of gift card.
Maybe I'm old, I got really tired on performing maintenance on other people's bad intent or mistakes. But you know what, sometimes, cutting things off from your life can be beneficial, it makes you focus on things that truly matter to you, or at least it triggers the review process while you making the decisions.
Do you really need a TV anyway? Just so you can then spend more on it to watch stuff that you'll probably forget within a week? Less stuff, less suffering.
> By algorithmic thinking, I mean defining a set of basic rules to follow and applying everyday...
This is actually kinda a good suggesting for everyday life as well. Many problem people face are too complex to figure out without systematic analysis, and with this method of thinking, complexity can be simplified.
Of course you have to do some swaps:
> Understand data flows -> Understand whats, hows and whys
> Choose appropriate data structures -> Choose appropriate tools
> Reason about time and space complexity -> Reason about cost and effectiveness
BTW: Is this article was about LLMs induced identity crisis? I noticed quite a few blogs written in a similar color trying to realign themselves in the new world of AI.
Of course that's a reasonable thing to consider, but in addition to that, I think it's also kinda useful to remember why you started as a software engineer to begin with, what were you planning that drives you to select this path? Will AIs be a blocker of that plan, or a enhancer?
> The outlandish claim has since spread far and wide
Is this significant? I never saw anyone talking about it on my side of corner.
But, It's not really that surprising. A significant part of human civilization still believes that we humans were created by beings who live somewhere in the sky/atmosphere, and these beings are watching our every move to punish or reward us, and you beg really really hard, they'll help you (if they didn't, you ain't begging hard enough).
What stops the CEOs or even employees of the AI firms from creating something harmful such as WMDs etc themselves? They almost definitely already have that access. And this is not a zero-possibility thing, given how some of the top CEOs has preformed these years. Remember that one guy who did a \o salute in public, and the private island thing?
If Americans don't like Chinese AI, all cool. But then maybe they should start true open AI companies to build for the betterment of mankind instead of letting these few for-profit CEOs daily yelling nonsensical lies to cover those profit-seeking sinister asses.
reply