skinfaxi

> "Not being seizable" hasn't really worked out for bitcoiners who've been arrested. Or for that matter robbed at gunpoint.

This seems orthogonal to the ability to seize assets.

What does that gate look like in practice?

What's stopping you from slowing down and doing those things even with AI?

What do you use now?

And they issue certs in your name, right?

> I'm really sad that those people keep releasing those tools to other people via cookie-cutter websites filled with misinformation instead of just enjoying them privately

Why would that make you really sad? If something scratches your itch, it might scratch someone else's, too. It's kind of like blogging for yourself when you solve an issue.

I have been feeling an increasing self-imposed pressure to get more done with AI. Similar to the feeling I get when I play factorio too long. It's like the frontier of possibility has radically shifted and I feel almost guilty for not jumping into it. Tugging at me..

Idk the point of my comment but I feel you.

Wow how is there not a corewar with LLMs?

Obligatory xkcd, everything is math. https://xkcd.com/435/

Wasn't there a purported breach of a huge KYC service, idscan recently? https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/fbi-investigates-massiv...

What is the law you are basing your theory?

Why would the manufacturer of a recording device be liable for its use counter to law?

I think things like onecli are the direction we will take. The secrets and state will be proxied api calls.

The title says "freeze a mac".

> They work terribly for persuasion.

I just experienced this in a conversation. An analogy offers an opportunity to engage with the straw man and miss the forest for the trees.

It has ever been the case that garbage in, garbage out. AI is nothing new in that regard.

All things being equal, AI actually enables this extremely hyper-personalized kind of gaslighting.

We really need a new Hanlon's razor for companies. Assume malice over ignorance because groups behave differently than individuals.

Fundamentally, doesn't gambling require a potential payout that is more valuable than the initial input? If you can only ever get less than you put in that's not really a gamble is it?

> This may become a case of we don't enforce the laws against large companies.

Why would Apple be a party here at all? Would Sony be a party if someone records another with a walkman?

Any friend or acquaintance that recorded without consent would probably not be in the friend group for much longer. If you don't trust your friends in the first place that seems the like problem to tackle.

People don't make rational decisions that make rationalized decisions. Is there any thought to pulling your hand off a hot surface?

In the US at least deaths will outpace births by 2030 so maybe a declining employment rate isn't as bad as it might seem in the long-term.

The former. Look at cities winding back shotspotter.

> If these models are such an existential threat to humanity, why are they controlled by two private companies?

The government routinely contracts with private companies to create arms and munitions. Or do you think the bombs are delivered without payloads?

I personally appreciate very much that this site doesn't have such a feature.

The patent was filed in 2009 https://patents.google.com/patent/US8246454B2/en

What's the incentive now and why would that change, in your view?

It's called the xy problem already.

Just say the AI did it on its own and you'll be off the hook.