cobbzilla

I’d agree that the word “reasonably” is carrying a lot here. But call it 20 years, no question. Look how far computers came from 1970 to 1990, that’s probably about the pace to expect, or faster.

The information revolution has been going on for >50 years. AI is one event in a broader arc. Wait 10 years when the humanoid robots become reasonably capable and affordable. We’re in the middle of it, but still so so far to go.

I’d have guessed the most common number would end in 867-5309 — I guess that shows my age!

putting this first — I love this concept and thank you.

and I always hate to be “that guy” but iirc the 1729 story has a legend to itself, and the common telling may not be wholly accurate. But again, I commend this endeavor!

Because no car company would ever announce they had an unsafe car. They’d fix the problem and announce an awesome car.

It’s a basic tort, HF could file a civil suit and probably win. But they don’t, for the same reason DoJ doesn’t press charges: TBTF

> You mandate parents to attend training and educations

Do you advance to struggle sessions and incarceration for noncompliant parents?

> Trying to appeal to the LLM is pointless

Not always. Recently Claude refused to run a task that involved queries on a database with PII. I told it (truthfully) that the job was for our lawyers and the PII is redacted in the final report, and then it complied.

the FTB is anything but timid and wimpy

if the voters and legislature have the “bravery” to pass the wealth tax law, it will be aggressively enforced by the FTB

the second-order effects, whatever they may be, would be clearly visible within a couple years.

Do you worry that if your worst enemies were in power, something that you or a friend might say would lead to an arrest?

Who decides what is hate speech? Apparently the current UK government has decided these things (among others) are so hateful their perpetrators must be arrested:

- private WhatsApp chats between friends

- standing still in public with hands folded in prayer

Be careful when you give sharp tools to the golem.

go ask your LLM to make a browser plugin to remove all periods, then stop complaining here

someone was a meat proxy

or, equivalently:

“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard”

Typically a Streisand effect involves filing a lawsuit to try to stop something, which then raises awareness more broadly and makes the problem you’re suing to correct worse. In the canonical example, it’s “everyone stop taking pictures of my house!”, now pictures of your house are everywhere.

With a reasonably more generous definition, this case can indeed be considered a Streisand effect, if the problem gets worse by calling attention to it because now more idiots know about it. But a lawsuit would seal the deal!

transformer is climbing up in the most-overloaded-terms category, jockeying for a spot somewhere among “service”, “template” and “zone”

Not OP, but it’s not incompatible that dark-energy expansion (and ultimate big rip event) in a child universe correlates to the same process as black hole evaporation (and final event) for the originating black hole, if the “black hole universe” theory holds and they remain geometrically connected.

can “penumbras and emanations” compete with hallucinations?

POSIWID

decades of reasonable, consistently applied housing policy led to the creation of islands of wealth, surrounded by oceans of poverty. ergo, this is the purpose. this is how the people there want to live. I left many years ago when I realized the futility of it all.

Someone tried to build the extra chair but the endless required studies and legal challenges from existing chair-sitters bankrupted the would-be chair builder.

Also the chair, if actually built, would be so expensive that one legged guy can’t afford it. His best hope is someone with a worse chair takes it, then he tries to take their seat, but there’s already a dozen two-legged guys in front of him.

whoa yeah that is weird then

I stand corrected. If it’s truly only the signatures and zero other identifying info, then yes you’re as secure as the underlying algorithm. I think they implied there are multiple device-originated signatures for different parts of the data, this may open some possibilities for cryptanalysis

sure but if you can tie “this person” to “this one photo”, then for any photo, Apple can (again, theoretically) identify all photos by that person.

it’s one step removed from identity.

fwiw i think this is an unambiguous improvement over current post-sensor attestations, it’s just good to explore the edges

Apple gets the device-signed image and replaces with a PCC signature to preserve anonymity.

> The final reference image is instead signed by Apple’s signing service, after validation by PCC.

So, if compelled, Apple could theoretically tell someone if two images came from the same camera.

Evolution Control Committee had some wild stuff too in a similar vein. Totally not on Spotify, sooooo many copyright issues.

a good album— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarhythm_Nation

I think it’s not a great illustration; the map looks like mercator so the shortest path would be curved and closer to the green path anyway. the red line is not “as the crow flies”. It would be more fair to show deviation from the actual (great circle) shortest path. Also agree the grid seems coarse.

You can’t MITM your clients unless you root-cert them. The clients are independently attesting to DD, you can’t spoof it unless you’re the client. The B2B provider can’t do this without MITM attack. Any “legitimate” partner doing this is instantly banned & probably sued.

Ships passing in the night. I’m not disagreeing with any of this, and yall still miss the point.

I understand that individuals can make purchases with the DD API. People who want to buy things without seeing ads can always do that. Very few people will do that.

I’m referring to the obvious B2B2C use case where a company embeds DD functionality via the API. Then you’d have to teach the trick to everyone who uses your app or service and that’s not practical. If you skip at the server it’s trivially detectable.

Whose DD API key is being used? This is not an anonymous access scenario. The DD API client is tied to some company, the behavior is detectable, they are banned.

Or do you give out KVMs to all your customers and say “place your DD orders with us this way”?

> You're talking about extinction, not social media or phone addiction.

Not saying you’re wrong but if I wanted to cultivate a mass hysteria as cover for a regulatory capture power play, this is exactly what I’d want everyone to believe.

for the company/account placing DD orders via CLI, instant ban hammer.

you don’t seem to understand, sure clients can block ads. servers can also refuse to proceed unless a provable step is taken, and that’s linked to your DD integration. Bad actors can easily been detected