News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

dejanseo

Re:Ox Alpha – A mysterious new AI model on Wednesday August 26, 2026 @10:07PM (#49458599)
Re:Ox-Alpha Is GLM on Wednesday August 26, 2026 @10:53AM (#49450249)
Re:Ox-Alpha Is GLM on Tuesday August 25, 2026 @06:39AM (#49431604)
This looks spot on, where is it from?
Re:Ox-Alpha Is GLM on Tuesday August 25, 2026 @06:34AM (#49431558)
Hey, it may be trivial, I'm pretty proud of it :)
Re:Ox-Alpha Is GLM on Tuesday August 25, 2026 @06:32AM (#49431548)
Hello! I wrote the above article and did the NCD on model outputs. The same thought crossed my mind when I saw Gemma misclassified as Gemini quite frequently. And GLM almost as Claude and not as Gemini at all. Gave me the feeling as if GLM didn't train on Gemini generated synthetic data at all but mainly on Claude and GPT.
Re:Ox-Alpha Is GLM on Tuesday August 25, 2026 @06:21AM (#49431459)
Author here. Tell me more. How do you use NCD and what is your concern about its application here? Should I have use da larger reference sample? You can test it in action here: https://dejan.ai/tools/ai/ (e.g. drop a claude article or GLM article in and see what it says, it's not perfect but reasonably good).
Re:How Claude marks AI-generated content on Tuesday August 11, 2026 @04:55AM (#49255141)
> "Claude models launched on or after August 2, 2026 support marking at launch."

No Anthropic model has been launched in August.

Google? When I brought a serious issue up in 2012 https://dejanseo.com.au/hijack/ Google never fixed it:

In summary, I can take any of your (or anyone else's content) pass more pagerank to it than the original page and then I become the original page. Not only that but all your inbound links now count towards my site and I can see your links in Search Console of my domain.

This is something link graph theory refers to as "link inversion" and is very harmful to smaller publishers.

The irony...
Trying to be objective and understand my own motivations here. Obviously I didn't do anything out of malice. But yes, I could have told Google directly about the problem, but then I'd have no cool story to publish on my blog. At the end of the day, that's what it boils down to. Now that I got too much attention from it, I regret all of it.
I hope so, and I also hope Chrome gets a fix for this.
Thank you! :)
Thank you. I'm not having a good time at the moment. Anyway, the basis of my test hypothesis is that people are easily fooled by URL both by HTTPS and brand recognition (e.g. subdomain) so I conducted a survey which revealed the very real problem: https://dejanseo.com.au/trust/

Raw data: https://dejanseo.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/survey-te...

Thank you, I did mess up and wish I could take it back. To everyone bashing on me, I'm truly sorry to offend so many people. That was not the intention. This was purely as you describe it, intellectual curiosity.

I really appreciate your comment and hope it's OK that I added it here: https://dejanseo.com.au/competitor-hack/#shawn

Not the first time either. Every now and again I get an interesting idea, test it and share it with the world. The test that was left forgotten had no commercial impact on anyone and very low traffic.
I just added a screenshot from search console: https://dejanseo.com.au/competitor-hack/

There's no manual penalty notice.

Where did I say I'm proud of this? Everyone keeps saying "proud". I chose to share it in public because it's a serious problem that others may be using it to do real harm. I blog about many things, most harmless and often very useful. I remember one other time when I exposed something broken in Google. I got penalised as a reward.
That would be marvellous.
You're welcome.
Hey, that's not very nice.
That's exactly right. Google has already punished me once for exposing a flaw (which they still haven't fixed): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4748094
Thank you Cyrus. I thought it would be obvious that this isn't a practical tactic a reputable brand could risk doing.
Hi everyone! I did this. It was just a random cool idea I wanted to try. It worked a little too well and I quickly moved it to a disposable site to test if the page will get penalised by Google. I got busy with other things and forgot about it. When I bumped into it again I decided to write about it, for two reasons: 1) To me it's hard to believe that Chrome would allow for this to happen in the first place and 2) that Google wouldn't penalise a site doing this. Well, since the story was published Google tracked down my test page (most likely by using the source code I revealed on my blog) and completely de-indexed the whole domain.