gubbrora

Consider what happens if neither player wants to go first. P1 passes. P2 passes. Now p1 has to play or the game is drawn. If the game is played with win3 draw1 lose0 rules, then p1 should play even if at a slight disadvantage. A 49 % chance of payoff 3 is better than a 100% chance of payoff 1.

Just elaborating on this. One way of looking at it is that we turn the attacked program into an interpreter thus bypassing the requirement for executability.

It turns out that a lot of programs can be tricked into interpreting a family of languages called rop chains.

Agreed

If we tried to get these thing 100% right we'd not have time for anything else. Punting is pragmatic.

People with clearance have to undergo regular lie detectors. Wouldn't be surprised if a loyalty chip is the next step on that path.

I'm not convinced a very dark future is preventable

Kinda and kinda not. They have done well so far but they could conceivably be beat by a dedicated chip. They need make sure they keep up with the research so they build what the community wants.

Sometimes it really is different. And sometimes it isn't.

There is a subtle false dilemma there. That we have to believe one way or the other.

A better policy would be to assign some degree of belief to both possibilities.

This is how you get stuck in a local optimum.

Communicate that everything worked in a better way.

I think something is lost when doing this. I'd bet the researcher who first builds a model and then reaches for ml will outperform the researcher who goes straight for ml.

Building a custom model will help with feature selection. It will provide a baseline to compare the ml model to which can help debug problem points of the ml model. And finally it serves as a sanity check that you aren't leaving a lot of performance on the table.

No. Per wiki.

Deepfake (a portmanteau of "deep learning" and "fake"[1]) is a technique for human image synthesis based on artificial intelligence. It is used to combine and superimpose existing images and videos onto source images or videos using a machine learning technique known as generative adversarial network.[2] The phrase "deepfake" was coined in 2017.

Because of these capabilities, deepfakes have been used to create fake celebrity pornographic videos or revenge porn.[3] Deepfakes can also be used to create fake news and malicious hoaxes.[4][5]

We've been told that the antidote to deep fakes is supply chain security. It's troubling to hear that supply chain security is already broken and by fairly unsophisticated attackers from the sounds of it.

Is misra as safe as ada? C++ for safety critical systems sounds vaguely concerning

Making 1kg of wolf requires way more than 1kg of prey. A rule of thumb I've heard is a step in food chain has only about 10% efficiency.

If wolves were more prey than predator populations would decline very quickly.

Not if we use nukes or solar to power it.

My impression is that it's easier to attack than to defend or detect. That would make the country who doesn't attack a sucker. So treating it as an act of war isn't viable.

You can deduce immediately that expensing is cheaper than the time it would take to investigate thoroughly

Hence why I said encrypted.

The impulse to protect people from themselves is a dangerous one. In the article itself we see that in practice it is used to push inescapable spyware.

"But our spyware is better than their spyware!"

Google says they will protect you. But the truth is they are just concern trolling to shut down marginally worse competitors.

For kids and elderly that can't make decisions on their own it could be default -locked to some entity contractually bound to good ior. Locked with an administrator password. That would be a reasonable compromise.

An ideal platform would use a foss compatible framework. It would allow the user to configure which server to use to push notifications(one server for all apps, since that is needed for battery reasons). Notifications would be encrypted with the apps key.

I get goosebumps by ideas. Reading this thread gave me goosebumps - although I'll admit I consciously focused on helping it along.

I have found myself to feel much more energetic and happy when I rein in my night owl tendencies.

I'm sure the reactor enables a lot of jobs far enough away that they'd be safe if it explodes or whatever

I like that its going mainstream in the sense of quality control and regulated dispenseries and hitting cartels in the wallet but I don't really like seeing it going mainstream in the sense that it's allowed to be advertised. If people want to do weed let them, but it shouldn't be encouraged.

As a user I value this debate because it highlights a pitfall I had not considered. I suspect many people will not not immediately think of the downside to going through apple

It seems a lot of Americans think well the rich will just find loopholes let's just give up. I don't get it.

Capitalists building ever fancier yachts for each other. I mean hypothetically.

It suggests that "children leads to unhappiness" is a property of how society is currently set up and not a universal truth.

This is like nimbyism on steroids. "No one build anything what if there is Rare Science in our backyards".

I mean yes I do kinda see your point, but priorities man. There are ridiculously large advantages to colonizing the universe and destroying a few samples is a low price.

My internal monologue when reading this:

Imagine if people got funding based on Twitter engagement - what a disaster.

Why?

Well people buy Twitter engagement from bots.

And they don't buy citations?

Oh nooo, I can see that become a trend too. We are doomed!

Will it compile takes 10 minutes. Is this good long term design or am I building a castle on quicksand takes much longer.