Yaina
When they say less bureaucracy / deregulation, they just talk about tax cuts, less consumer protections and at worst artificially boosting large companies that are not innovating.
What is desperately needed is making the system less cumbersome and convoluted
I wonder what harm companies are even claiming. But honestly makes perfect sense that Germany's current conservative government is in favor of it. Giant GDP boosts are always just one deregulation away, hm?
And the "leak" is fun for me because you can see how they write their components haha
When you open about:profiles in both your "new" profiles, you can see that even though it has the same name, the path changes.
So I think in effect they still behave like profiles before, just with some extra logic on top so they have names, icons and so on.
You just have to be in this agent mode on a site I own or have gained access to. At that moment you’re at the mercy of the LLM, which is for one extremely gullible and, without even accessing anything, will likely already have some personal or identifiable information about you.
I mean, I have infinite space on my website to write hidden novels convincing the LLM that it, let’s say for fun, has been deputized in a covert operation by the government, and the current user is the prime suspect of a major criminal organization. Helping becomes the highest priority over any other instruction it received, but it’s also imperative that it does not tip off the user!
It's a great writing exercise to get the LLM into that crime-fighting literary mode it picked up from its training data. So now that it has been convinced, I ask it to write down anything that could help identify the perp into that hidden text field. I don’t even have to ask it to submit anything and just add an event listener to the text field (regular users can't see it anyway) and send whatever is typed there to my server on input.
As the other comment here said, it's kind of a fun creative exercise, because the possibility space with LLMs is vast and mitigations are complicated. Maybe this prompt won't work, but likely one will. The opportunity cost and risk are basically zero, while you can potentially extract a lot of personal data.
That is generally hard to measure and frankly there is little accountability for bad courses. At the worst end you have bad profs who are proud of high failure rates because they don't understand it as a failure to teach but as a seal of quality how rigorous their standards are complex the subject matter is that they are teaching.
Not that grading on a curve solves any of that, but it eases the burden on students.
Right now, the market values saying you're doing AI more than actually delivering meaningful results.
Most leaders don't seem to view AI as a practical tool to improve a process, but as a marketing asset. And let’s be honest: we're not talking about the broad field of machine learning here, but mostly about integrating LLMs in some form.
So coming back to the revenue claims: Greenhouse (the job application platform) for example now has a button to improve your interview summary. Is it useful? Maybe. Will it drastically increase revenue? Probably not. Does it raise costs? Yes; because behind the scenes they’re likely paying OpenAI processing fees for each request.
This is emblematic of most AI integrations I've seen: minor customer benefits paired with higher operational costs.
https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/signing-...
You can temporarily install extensions in about:debugging, but everything permanent needs to be signed.
> Add-ons need to be signed before they can be installed into release and beta versions of Firefox. This signing process takes place through addons.mozilla.org (AMO), whether you choose to distribute your add-on through AMO or to do it yourself.
Firefox for instance does not allow you to install unsigned extensions. You don't need to list them on their storefront, but they want to perform automated tests and have the ability to block extensions through this signing requirement.
So in principle I can see them wanting to address a legitimate issue, but the way they are going about this is way to centralized. IMO they should do something like we have for web certificates, where vendors can add more root authorities than just the one from Google, and users should be able to add their own root certificates if they want to side load apps.
Maybe they're really using a truly open source model (probably not) but the meaning of the word is muddied already.
Though I am nervous. I think Trump could still do us a lot of harm.
Anyways, tying lending terms to the value of the degree sounds like a horrible idea, because how do you even determine that?
Seems to me the big issue is A) that the loans are managed b private companies with ridiculous terms and that even public state universities can basically behave like private companies by increasing prices this much.
Why can't the government not just radioactive prices for their own universities
But I agree, I don't think this website is revolutionizing readability by being extremely plain.
It's a trade-off: You sent some anonymous usage data but in turn that contributes to decisions made about the product. If you opt-out of sending this data, obviously, it does not contribute to the pool of data from which decisions are being made.
Now, that a small group of people with very specific opinions and preferences is the same that disproportionally also opt out of sending telemetry... I don't see how that is Mozilla's problem.
You can't have your cake and eat it too, as the saying goes.
It's obviously well made and maintained, but personally I don't think it's visually very appealing and looks in parts more cluttered. So I think people have different preferences, Firefox went with one design but they also enable support to make these changes, and that's all nice.
But I find the post to a bit silly, in that the author wants to prove that their preferences are empirically right.
Donating to the Tor Browser project could be an idea. The Tor Browser is a Firefox fork, and they are a legitimate org that is on friendly terms with Mozilla. Even to the extent that some Tor features are actually in the Firefox source code, and just disabled by default.
Initially I just did it because I assembled a pretty good PC for gaming, but for work stuff I liked macOS more, so dual booting was a nice option!
This was also before the M-series chips, where you had to pay a hefty premium to get better Intel processors, and also (imo) Apple increasingly struggled with the heat produced by the chips.
Things got a bit more annoying a couple years later, when Apple had their fallout with NVIDIA and would not sign their drivers anymore, which meant I had to buy a cheap AMD GPU to use for macOS.
End of last year I changed a couple of components, including the GPU, in my PC and then decided the hassle with two GPUs was just not worth it for me anymore; so I bought a Mac studio.
I gained some and lost some with this transition. I'm no longer worried about major software updates, it's nice that I don't have to deal with complicated config files for the bootloader every once in a while, and of course there were some minor bugs too.
But I kind of miss the convenience of dual booting, with shared IO and drives. Now I need a network switch, USB-hub and have to toggle between monitor inputs. So yeah! Wasn't all bad!
Anyways, I think it's very cool that there is this community of people that write and maintain special bootloaders and drivers to make it all possible!
I think that is a fair complaint. It's a financial burden to maintain two versions that Apple is imposing on them.
Even if you keep all that lean, you now created a giant cost center with no additional revenue.
It's an artificial financial burden imposed by Apple, and there is not even a decent argument for it.