WantonQuantum

Reading through the article, it seems that the exploited vulnerability is "open source AI systems and services. Most of the victims were running vulnerable, internet-facing versions of LiteLLM and Ollama. Additionally, hundreds of victims were running Gotenberg, a PDF converter, and software development platform Gitea."

The poetry is just a way of obfuscating the current IP address of the botnet control server stored in an otherwise vanilla fork of the nodejs.org website on github.

Despite the article saying that it uses "an AI jailbreak technique that turns harmful prompts into poems to trick LLMs into bypassing safety guardrails", I can't see anything that implies this is true.

I could be wrong - it's poorly written article.

I use a pair of PineBuds Pro with my iPhone. They have open firmware. I don't see any reason to pay more for airpods.

Edit to add: Previous HN discussions about PineBuds https://hn.algolia.com/?q=PineBuds

I find quite a lot of it very satisfying. For example, the deep mathematical symmetries of gauge theory and how they relate to the observed forces of the universe is truly amazing.

The excellent Arvin Ash has a very accessible video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paQLJKtiAEE

The device you used to make this comment relies heavily on quantum effects to make efficient transistors. The necessary theoretical understanding of semiconductors did not exist 120 years ago.

Don't miss the drawings people have made to the north of the starting place! Zoom all the way out with the mouse wheel and then click and drag.

This is fun! Took me a little while to realise that if I don't click the green tick, it doesn't save my word.

See also discussion here and non-paywalled link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46503733

tldr: AI voice synthesis isn’t just a technical novelty. When male-dominated platforms and creators simulate female voices, it can obscure real female voices and reinforce existing power imbalances in who gets heard, especially in music and media. Genuine representation matters.

I wouldn't characterize what Linus has written as "lashing out". He's just making a sensible engineering decision about what the linux kernel is and is not. For Linus, the tone is way below the threshold of "lashing out".

It's difficult to even have a conversation about unions due to people having very different perceptions and/or feelings about unionism.

If you haven't encountered Gene Ray's "Time Cube" before, you should be aware that it's likely that he had a mental health problem.

This is amazing! I remember playing some of these in the 90s. Fond memories.

BTW, this site is likely not set up to handle a HN hug of death of downloads so consider throttling your downloads if you can.

I don't use bluesky, can you give me an example of conspiracy theories on the platform?

Don't worry, Trump always chickens out.

The attack boils down to sending phishing emails that contain a url that looks like a legitimate booking.com url but is actually this url. Note the unicode characters that can make it seem like a booking.com url:

https://account.booking.xn--comdetailrestric-access-ge5vga.w...

More info here (the video refers to this page describing the attack): https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/bookingcom-ph...

Edit: HN presents the unicode characters in the domain in a way that makes it clear they're not slashes (well done HN!) so you'll need to look at the url when you hover over it.

That link doesn't work for me - it just redirects to www.surgehq.ai

My order is a "long black" with 3 shots. I'm in Australia so that means three espresso shots with some hot water to make it normal coffee sized. It looks like a cup of filter coffee but I prefer the taste of the espresso coffee.

The actual paper on arxiv.org (https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.13461) says that they _predict_ the ability to create gold from mercury using _simulations_.

That's quite a read! Looks like emacs has done an amazing job of handling text correctly in the face of quite a few challenges. Including cases where there perhaps is no "correct" choice.

Now, I'm certainly not in the "all C code must be rewritten in Rust because security" camp but it does raise the question: With all this complexity how do I know that pasting text from a web page into emacs (or any editor really) isn't going to trigger an undiscovered vulnerability?

Edit: I guess that's rhetorical question because of course the answer is "you don't".

Last year I decided to plan ahead for a career change to become a counselor. I started volunteering with a crisis support help line (lifeline.org.au) and did their training course (quite substantial!). I'm now doing volunteer shifts and getting some experience. In the future I will do some more formal courses while continuing to volunteer and likely cut back my hours working as a dev (over 30 years experience). My ultimate goal, when my financial position allows it, is to work full time or perhaps part time as a counselor whether that is my own business or through some other organisation or a combination.

What does "think to itself" mean? If, for example, your plan is start with some initial prompt like "Start thinking" and then simply feed the response from that back in as the next prompt, I guarantee you'll be disappointed by the result after about 5 minutes. 100k hours won't make it any better.

I definitely read through the changes in my PRs to make sure I haven't done anything obviously wrong.

This would be a lot more compelling if it addressed the obvious logical fallacy: It's written by a person who took a risk and it paid off. It might not work out the same way for the reader.

Also, the author provides two other examples of people who took the risk and it paid off, except those people are clearly selected due to how the author knows them - through the work they are all involved in.

This article is basically saying: if you take a look at 3 examples of people who took a risk and it happened to pay off for them then it's logical to conclude that it'll pay off for you too. Which is rubbish. I could find 3 people who won the lottery and then claim that you too can win the lottery if you just take a shot at it.

Discussion also here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44979244

> Take more time for yourself. Make your own meals, keep in shape, spend time on that hobby that keeps you developing your talents. Walk more.

This is good advice. There's not a small amount of irony that I'm writing this reply agreeing with you instead of actually doing any of those things.

One reason (and certainly not the only reason) is that our governments are using economic growth, specifically GDP growth as a primary measure of success. That naturally leads to under spending on education, health, police, infrastructure, programs for disadvantaged, etc.

It's also justified the destruction of workers rights, which has led to a huge number of people being paid less in insecure jobs forcing them to work longer hours.

There was a time when ideas like "a rising tide lifts all boats" and trickle-down economics justified focusing economic success but increasing inequality has shown that it's not true.

Edit: And of course technology has enabled a lot of this.

See also for discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44892209

The "lambda lifting" seems to be referring to section 3.11 "Complex Constants" in the linked Ghuloum PDF:

Scheme’s constants are not limited to the immediate objects. Using the quote form, lists, vectors, and strings can be turned into constants as well. The formal semantics of Scheme require that quoted constants always evaluate to the same object. The following example must always evaluate to true:

    (let ((f (lambda () (quote (1 . "H")))))
      (eq? (f) (f)))

So, in general, we cannot transform a quoted constant into an unquoted series of constructions as the following incorrect transformation demonstrates:

    (let ((f (lambda () (cons 1 (string #\H)))))
      (eq? (f) (f)))

One way of implementing complex constants is by lifting their construction to the top of the program. The example program can be transformed to an equivalent program containing no complex constants as follows:

    (let ((tmp0 (cons 1 (string #\H))))
      (let ((f (lambda () tmp0)))
        (eq? (f) (f))))

Performing this transformation before closure conversion makes the introduced temporaries occur as free variables in the enclosing lambdas. This increases the size of many closures, increasing heap consumption and slowing down the compiled programs. Another approach for implementing complex constants is by introducing global memory locations to hold the values of these constants. Every complex constant is assigned a label, denoting its location. All the complex constants are initialized at the start of the program. Our running example would be transformed to:

    (labels ((f0 (code () () (constant-ref t1)))
             (t1 (datum)))
      (constant-init t1 (cons 1 (string #\H)))
      (let ((f (closure f0)))
        (eq? (f) (f))))

The code generator should now be modified to handle the data labels as well as the two internal forms constant-ref and constant-init.

I'm no defense expert but it seems like a good idea to select a country with aligning strategic interests, all else being equal. Both Japan and Australia will be focused on the Indo-Pacific region for the foreseeable future.

It's important to note that this only bans under 16s from having an account. They can still watch youtube videos.