EmbarrassedHelp

Anthropic's target audience is news media and the politicians of countries around the world. Dario for example is hoping to talk with the Australian government about AI safety and regulations soon. Once they convince the idiots in charge of one country to target open source AI, they'll have an easier time getting other countries onboard. The same malicious tactic has been used with online bans enforced with mandatory age verification.

There are already incidents from other non publicly released models.

They do however seem to have enough political capital to convince politicians in other countries to target open source AI, which is probably why Dario wants to speak with the idiots running the Australian government.

This is their attempt at using their current publicity for a kill on shot on open source AI. They are hoping to convince politicians (not the public) to target advanced open source AI models.

Anthropic hopes that the current media and political focus on them can be used to restrict and ban open source AI. They might even be able to achieve that in some countries.

I bet the reason Dario wants to meet with the Australian government, is because he feels like he can convince them to ban open source AI models. Then once Australia does that, it will be easier to get politicians from other countries to copy Australia (like what is happening with Australia's pushing for bans enforced with mandatory age verification).

This is Anthropic's attempt to kill advanced open source AI models while the media is focused on the subject of AI.

They are still trying to force that anti-privacy bullshit on everyone.

It also makes users feel more comfortable posting awful comments and comments that lack critical thinking skills.

Its a shame that Ursula von der Leyen never learned anything from this, and is now trying to force through legislation requiring mandatory age verification for everything (EU Kids Act).

> But apple also cannot just stop selling or supporting their product in the UK either.

They can do both of things. There's no law against leaving a country for not respecting human rights like privacy and encryption.

The UK is currently demanding that Apple install mandatory OS level client side real time scanning malware on every device, bypassing all security and encryption to monitor everything. Its an insanely evil and completely unacceptable demand.

Apple should withdraw from the UK until the UK government learns to respect encryption and privacy.

It locks down devices like ransomware, permanently restricting functionality of web browsers, messaging apps, and other apps until the user submits to age verification. Its mandatory if you want your device to function normally without restrictions.

I'd love to see the GrapheneOS team gaining enough resources to hire developers who can work to increase the number of supported devices. The more devices that are supported (even if security is not at the same level as Pixel/Motorola hardware), as the more popular GrapheneOS becomes, the harder it will be for governments to target it.

I imagine that banking apps will begin to have better support for GrapheneOS as it rises in popularity.

They should not be trying to implement it globally. That is unacceptable.

Based on how easy it is to make these watermarks encode personal information, its basically guaranteed that people are going to use it for privacy violations and surveillance.

Though that doesn't contain the millions of sites and IP addresses that get blocked everything there is a football match happening.

4. Spain is a major supporter of Chat Control and encryption backdoors.

Unfortunately for the tattooist, the UK government considers it "harmful" nudity. I'm not sure why the BBC reporter is ignoring that fact.

> "They shouldn't be treated as something shameful or sexual," she said.

Curious that the BBC is completely ignoring the UK government insane demands for mandatory OS level client side scanning malware on every device to block all nudity. This tattooist may find themselves unable to even view their work on their own smartphone.

> Carter says her posts are automatically removed "nine times out of 10". She always appeals the decision, but "it's as if nobody even reads it".

There are multiple large communities of people who have suffered false bans with no functioning appeal system to solve the issue. You are basically screwed unless you or someone you know has connections to the company that can resolve the issue. Politicians and those with enough fame or money don't understand this, because their accounts get special treatment.

Apple's failed attempt at adding client side scanning for illegal content should have made everyone weary of trusting them when it comes to security and privacy. The idea should have been killed long before it even became public.

Nobody is worry about making the jobs of age verification companies trying to violate user privacy any easier. In fact we should be moving towards new ways of circumventing these attacks on privacy.

Use parental controls on your child's device if you don't want them seeing things. Don't use your bad parenting as an excuse to violate privacy with age verification for everyone else.

How is this not bigger news? The UK is demanding mandatory client side scanning malware that watches everything you see/do, on every smartphone in the country. This includes spying on encrypted messages before they are encrypted.

The EU Commission is currently rushing ahead with their anti-privacy age verification plans that require Google/Apple account to function. They aren't going to save anyone from this.

I also wouldn't be surprised to learn that the Commission is trying to get Google to be more proactive at banning accounts and preventing individuals from being able to create new ones. That's what the States were demanding in the recent court case against Meta.

Politicians have been pushing companies to be more aggressive about banning individuals who open new accounts after their previous one gets banned. That was even one of the requirements of the deal in the recent social media court case in the US.

Canada is about the learn this lesson the hard way with bill C-22. At the rate things are going, Canadians will wake up to find themselves being blocked by WhatsApp, iMessage, Signal and other popular messaging apps.

The legislation currently have weak surface level protections against encryption backdoors, but law enforcement are seeking to remove those. The legislation also requires mandatory data retention and surveillance, which also means that messaging apps will ban Canada.

They already have said they will do that, and Apple has already blocked services from the UK rather than comply with their anti-encryption insanity.

Why would someone paying for an expensive camera to damage the pixels of their images with "invisible" watermarks?

The only people living in a fantasy world are the ones that want mandatory online age verification for social media, adult content, private messaging, video games, and things of that nature.