2,174 karma · joined August 27, 2012
Interest and opinions on technology ethics, privacy, UX, big tech good and evil, methods, madness.
I've seen the satellite images. You could probably throw a baseball from the compound to the school.
If Iran's navy were stationed off the Florida coast and their commanders making threats, US authorities would remove children from the schools near military bases. Wouldn't they?
All parties are expected to protect civilians. Iran were obligated to move non-combatants, especially children, out of immediate danger zones around military targets. They didn't do that. Instead the school was packed with kids while US military is parked outside, tensions higher than ever. Iranian authorities failed their own people. Again.
You are right about the old templating systems. I still use them. I still use PHP, it's ridiculously fast and mature. It has a readability unmatched by other languages (for devs like me with design background).
I'm surprised to hear CS people like yourself talking up the old templating systems!
> I hate modern web development.
For me, modern web dev is about modern CSS and JS and native browser APIs and all that fun stuff. It's ironic now with LLMs, the people caught in the grinding gears of MVC bloat are benefiting least from LLM.
Well, perhaps I can't make that claim, but the point is LLMs do a fantastic job at focused, single-layer arrangements such as the good old templating systems, vanilla JS and just direct "old school" frontend coding. Why burden ourselves or the LLM with truck loads of layered dependencies or a million steps to hello world? No need but people get angry on this topic though, so I just do my thing in my corner of the web and deliver results for those I build for.
In reality, deliberately taking a second recording device other than your phone, escalates intention and risk. If we assume the visitors were unaware of the phone rule before arrival, there's no chance anyone will bring a second recording device.
> A visitor who wants to record...
Will use the recording device they already carry.
If discovered, your phone can hide behind a million excuses. "whoops, I forgot to end my call" or "whoops, I forgot to shut down my streaming app." It can also hide its recording status when using certain covert or custom apps. It is the ultimate recording device able to operate in the open.
His mistrust might be about the phone's owner and the recording apps they might use, more than the smartphone itself.
Socially it's much safer to direct suspicion at "the smartphone" rather than the people invited to your house.
The question wasn't "do you know this riddle", she just wanted the riddle answered. No need to make it more complicated.
There's no lie in withholding information never asked for. It's possible the request for a new riddle was interpreted as a ploy to get an easier riddle.
If the project is a mountain, I want AI to assist with the climb so I can learn the mountain, its trails and details. Hitching a free helicopter ride to the summit would leave me with little understanding about the mountain other than the view from the top.
Your claim directly contradicts Musk's statement on the issue:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350
Your claim also doesn't align with actual testing of the platform. This raises the question, why are you here posting disinformation?
By your own admission, you've seen it generate such things.
Meanwhile, I've never seen it generate such things because I don't write sicko prompts, and the guardrails in place prevent such images. Most people have never seen it generate such things, but apparently you have. I couldn't be more intellectually honest if I tried.
How dare they show people stuff!
Reminds me of the perpetrators of crimes against women who blame what women wear. "She provoked me by showing her ankles! I didn't like it but the next day she was showing me her ankles again!"
Now the counter-weight over-compensation. Insisting the tool "doesn't have enough safeguards". Could it be that our AI usage innocence is related to how much we criticise the tool for not policing us enough?
Meanwhile the rest of us have never seen such images because we're not looking for those images, or trying to prompt for those images, or thinking about those images. How about the people using these tools take responsibility, rather than forcing colossal layers of safeguards on everything and everyone?
Must be stressful maintaining the low quality rhetoric and negativity?
Straight from reddit I presume, to regurgitate tales about cave divers. This is the diver who bizarrely and publicly attacked Musk for trying to help rescue kids from a cave. "Shove his submarine up his rear end" or something. Musk fired back his own stupid words. The court awarded the diver zero dollars. Diver wanted $190 million! Pay day denied! Justice served.
> The real life people I know...
Any real life person who keeps it real, knows the diver was an absolute tool. Attempting to twist history for some kind anti-Musk ammo is a fool's game.
The "addictive" insisting by 2 new ones in short time? Getting bot vibes. "We need to classify social media as an addictive substance" more or less. Is that from someone's e-safety commissioner? Or someone wanting back-pay compo right back to MySpace addiction. An absurd idea.
"Some people can't control themselves around video games therefore video games bad", that's what social media has copped.
"Addictive" might mean a bloody well designed user interface that users like. Making buttons easy to access and responsive feedback and just the right amount of visual cues and spicy labels, all in harmony as designed and delivered via well engineered mechanisms. "Too addictive, you must now jump through regulatory hoops". No!
Nobody said you can't. They said the happiness is "decoupled from truth", which isn't ideal if we care about objective health of a society.
Your position seems to imply support for society-level submission to religious dogma. There's no point ignoring actual examples of all these ideas.
Hold an "uncommon belief"? According to you, it's a sign you're wrong. "the world isn't crazy, it's you who's missing something"... and you even say "let people continue being wrong for the sake of being social."
I don't think you meant to express support for strict religious rule and population submission, but that's how I'm reading it.
Your argument supports those who seek submission from the population. You don't require objective truth to play a role in happiness. You have found value in submission that serves to neutralise dissent. Dissent when coming from the few, isn't worth your time. Peg those few dissenters as "probably wrong" and call it a day.
There's almost endless choice of legit quality native apps for kids, curated from trusted sources. These alone far exceed healthy screen time if all were downloaded. Or as you say, curated web links in a locked browser.
How much screen time should kids do anyway, it's crazy how much is available before worrying about WWW on top of their games, apps and videos.
From your linked study:
"The prompts used to create the images were not analyzed, so the findings do not provide an assessment of how many of the images were created without the consent of the people pictured or altered images which were already sexualized"
If someone uses Photoshop to create revolting images, do we rage against Adobe and the CEO? How about we act like grown-ups and focus on individual responsibility for using AI tools, or any tools?
The point remains. X responded to concerns, tightened the restrictions, and now people are complaining about too much moderation. Mass censorship isn't the path to a safer world. Banning everything isn't the path to a safer world.
Most people don't want to see revolting or inappropriate sexualized images, so they don't search for or prompt that content. That content is officially unwanted by the platform. There's always gray areas. Sometimes artists use the naked human form, and other times artworks may make you uncomfortable. Instead of declaring a moral calamity and linking to lobbyists asking for money, just move on to things more to your taste. Take responsibility for your own online activity. That's what adults do.
Many users including Musk responded at the time saying he's seen literally zero underage images generated by Grok:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350
Anyone can use a range of offline tools and processes to generate nasty images, then blame whoever they want for that image. But who cares about that when there's outrage to spread am I right?
Your comment made it sound like "out of the box" Grok can generate AI porn. It can't.
That reddit sub you mention is tame compared to something like unstable_diffusion where the AI-porn hobbyists use locally installed models. Some of the comments in the grok_porn sub are complaining about censorship, and literally complaining about how the anime hack isn't working. So you've only confirmed my point and contradicted your own.
I've been messing around with sci-fi horror themes including graphic gore. Grok now does gore when before it wouldn't. When I tried nudity, it refused. This is with AI-generated images from scratch, nothing uploaded.
Even "romantic love scene between consenting adults" was denied by Grok. It did 6 seconds of lightweight kissing, then refused to continue. The overwhelming evidence is that Grok does not ordinarily do "AI Porn". It doesn't advertise that it does, and won't produce it in normal circumstances when prompted.
Did you just make that up?
Grok barely makes "M-rated" nudity, let alone porn. Musk recently claimed it can do "R-Rated content", but his post got a community note saying otherwise.
The hallucination issue put a big dent in AI's reputation for non-technical older people who do not take kindly to being lied to by a machine.
Have you considered the possibility that more than one website picked up the volcanic cabins story because it's interesting?
Both articles mention the source: https://plat.asia which is clearly a genuine architecture site.
If you hosted a blog with architecture category, you might also write a post about the volcanic cabins. If the source allows publishing those high-res photos, why wouldn't you?
He lashes out, accusing others of lies, spin, gaslighting and peddling. He refers to "Twitter morons", takes a swipe at Trump (who doesn't) and self-delights in the belief that Anthropic are seen as "heroes" while the competition "sketchy".
Not a great post. It's in the own goal zone.
That said, if the US/Israel didn't do it, we'd have heard a denial by now. Perhaps the target was a nearby military site. Placing military sites next to schools sounds like a tactic from the Hamas Resistance handbook.
Before you ask "how's that going", remember that doing nothing wouldn't result in a satisfactory answer to that question either.
The idea that "killing the enemies turns the rest of the world into enemies" is absurd. Other countries wouldn't follow the Iranian regime into martyrdom. What would be the reason: "we don't like war"?
Nobody likes war, but also nobody likes evil dictators emerging on this planet and repressing 90 million of its inhabitants, and waging industrial scale terrorism offensives beyond its borders.
Looks like an optics dance to me. I've noticed a lot of simultaneous positions lately, everyone from politicians and protesters, to celebrities and corporations. They make statements both in support of a thing, and against that same thing. Switching up emphasis based on who the audience is in what context. A way to please everyone.
To me the statement reads like Anthropic wants to be at the table, ready to talk and negotiate, to work things out. Don't expect updated bullet-point lists about how things are worked out. Expect the occasional "we are the goodies" statements, however.
Guessing their comment attempts to expose hypocrisy of America's keenly supported overseas military activity in conflict with fiercely defended domestic free-speech and liberty principles. Deep down, most allies of America want America to defeat foreign adversaries and keep defending those liberties many of us share. In other words there's no hypocrisy, carry on!