franga2000

Nobody said its surprising. Everyone knows this is on purpose. That's why it's even more important to fight it.

Since there's a lot of talk about the CEF update, does anyone know why they compiled it in instead of having it as a normal plugin? It's incredibly annoying that compiling OBS means compliling almost all of chromium...

Nobody said it's efficient, welcome to the modern IT landscape. The docs are surely some SaaS with a WYSIWYG editor, access controls and analytics. Every page probably does a dozen database lookups and involves 3 mixroservices and 4 external providers minimum.

Maybe? But it also doesn't necessarily belong into the prompt. The model probably accesses the help pages as a RAG knowledgebase, so putting it there makes sense.

What? This is the most logical solution and the most likely one given the behaviour seen in the post. And even if they were sending every human reader the LLM content too, who cares? It's a few kilobytes at worst in a multi-megabyte page.

Honestly, this is a clever way of doing this. It means the additional instructions are stored alongside the text they reference, which makes it easier for doc writers to keep in sync and it probably also makes it more effective since the bot is guaranteed to read it at the right time in the right context.

I doubt they actually send it with every request and hide it in CSS, it probably does some other kind of check (IP, user agent, token...). This also tracks with the fact it is now entirely gone - presumably they just fixed that if statement and it's again chatbot-only.

There has always been the possibility that people would do dumb things with email they receive, but it wasn't a widespread thing to do, there weren't many reasons to do them and the tools weren't easily accessible to most people.

But LLM agents are really useful and the tools to give one access to your entire digital life is just an OAuth prompt away.

Soo many more things than banking apps at this point. Things as normal as looking at train schedules, grocery store catalogues, ordering a taxi... sometimes have SafetyNet DRM.

When you publish apps on Google Play, the Play Developer Console even nags you to use harder obfuscation and implement Google's DRM to, allegedly, protect yourself and your users.

Can the EU finally make this shit illegal? Oh wait, they're pusing for mandatory DRM too... Fuck.

> a long list of SMB server improvements

This is how I learned there's a mainline kernel-mode SMB server!

https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/smb/ksmbd.html

So you can't pay a janitor enough to deal with vandals, but somehow the minimum wage bartender that already has to tend to a bar and cash register is able to keep their toilets clean no problem?

It's not that hard to make toilets that are nearly indestructible and can be very efficiently cleaned by a guy in a "hazmat" suit with a pressure washer. It probably wouldn't be that hard to largely automate this. But the market for this is small and mostly governments, so prices are high and innovation is low.

Nobody said no access to porn harms children. They said that mandatory age verification, primarily but not exclusively targeting porn, has side effects that harm children, which is honestly very predictable.

Go look at some of these laws around the world, or especially the proposals that didn't make it through the first round and their proponents are trying again. It's never just porn.

And what, even if they don't have documents through full fault of their own, they shouldn't be able to access information and means of communication?

And assuming everyone you care about is able to get documents, do you think they shouldn't be allowed to access information or means of communication anonymously?

The argument about people who can't prove their identity is a distraction. The argument should be why are we requiring anyone to do that in the first place?

To take it one step further: how does the election authority convince everyone that their vote was counted?

Us "computer folks" convincing ourselves is the easy part. Maybe after enough studying of the system, I'd be absolutely sure that my vote was counted, but what would the other 90 % of the population think? This not a "people are stupid" argument, a brain surgeon or nuclear physicist or philosopher isn't going to put in the effort to understand fully homomorphic cryptography, hardware-based security, etc. Why should they?

The alternative works perfectly fine and it's so easy to explain. It's obvious to anyone, no matter their level or field of education, how their vote makes it from their hand into the tally, what prevents it from being misused and what they can do to further reduce that already tiny probability.

You can see, feel and experience the technical measures keeping your vote safe. The people keeping their eyes on the ballot box alp day may literally be your neighbours, as are the people counting. You can reason about their motivations, you can theorise in your head about what lengths you'd have to go to in order to change even a few votes and how unlikely you would be to succeed.

The biggest danger to elections, ultimately, isn't the risk of cheating. It's the risk of losing the people's trust.

(I'm in the local election commission (that's layer 2 out of 4 in our particular election management hierarcy), we just had a big referendum, everyone keeps asking me about online elections so this rant was fresh on my mind)

I don't know about these days, but at some point neither Debian or Ubuntu Server shipped with Git. You can still find tutorials that start with apt-get update and apt-get install git-core

You don't have to talk to me like a twitter-addicted baby, I was never on it and I probably open a twitter like three times per year.

If you're happy getting your information second-hand, I guess that's your choice, but not everyone is. If I read a news article that cites a tweet as a source, I'd like to see the rest of the tweet thread for context. It might not be what it seems.

All the american billionaires and CEOs are still on Twitter, as is the shitposter-in-chief.

What the people defacto running the world's most powerful economy are saying seems quite important to get from a primary source. It's so easy to take a few screenshots of a few tweets and write many completely contradictory stories.

A lot of important information is on Twitter. Being able to access it without giving them your personal information and without jumping through hoops is a good thing.

> Want to feature your product in a fake meeting? > Advertise with us →

Best monetization strategy for a shitpost I've ever seen!

Google: scans all books, people can search for them, find little snippets, see the title and author, buy the book to read it

AI: scans all art, people can ask it to produce art they're searching for, no reference to the original or its author, people no longer pay artists/designers/...

I think there's a very obvious distinction there. The whole purpose of copyright is ensuring the financial viability of creating works. AI slop is a direct market substitute for the originals it ate up for training, so it goes directly against that. Meanwhile, search actually improves the reach of works and, well, snippets and summaries are somewhere in between...

You'd be surprised. People regularly say that this is completely fair because the higher-paid people worked harder to get their education/skills/whatever, or that they literally just paid more for their education and that investment should be returned. I've head many other roundabout ways of basically saying "it's a fair system, people just need to work garder/smarter/whatever" and they actually believe it.

Makes it that much more absurd that tooling on modern platforms isn't anywhere near this level of discoverability and developer-friendliness.

I'm not sure if that's the right term, but by discoverability I basically mean having things like pallettes, property editors, visual builders, codegen... Basically that I can look at the pallete of widgets, drag a button onto the screen, click on it, see and rich-edit all the possible properties about the button, one-click codegen an event handler for any possible event of the button... No documentation, no guessing the names of properties of events, everything is just there right in front of me. I miss that from VB.

Do you really lack any imagination at all? Come on, at least scroll around the rest of this comment tree a bit...

This whole discussion is about the fact that it isn't paid well but it should be paid well.

But yeah, if "as far as you're concerned", what defines value is only the price under an unconstrained suppy-demand system, then this discussion won't go anywhere.

There are many inherent incentives that we correct for with laws. The incentive for people to shoplift is high, but we counter it with the threat of fines or jail. Similarly, the incentive is to raise prices / undercut wages / do arbitrage... and we can counter that with similar punishments.

I'm not saying I have the magic formula for how to codify such crimes and what punishment would be appropriate, but it took us hundreds of years to figure out how to effectively deal with even very basic crimes (and some countries still struggle with those).

Why does a kid in kindergarten that hoards all the crayons for himself get told off, but buying all the masks during a pandemic to sell at an insane profit was considered valid economic activity? We have arbitrarily decided that various tiers of "being an asshole" are somewhere between ssocially unacceptable and criminal, but if you're making money, being an asshole is fine. We can change that.

You're mixing up two parts of the discussion. This is unfair, THEREFORE we should ____. You need to agree on what the problem is, why it's a problem and what the outcome should be, then you can get to the methods.

And no, not that much. Automation is of course a factor, but it came at different times for different things and don't forget that it often made things worse for workers, at least where or when they didn't have institutional support.

Having institutional support for workers (unions and a pro-labour government) is what ultimately matters. Even if some prices go up and some jobs are lost, such institutions help smooth out the transition and put pressure on businesses which would otherwise jump at the opportunity to also increase their margins.

Less lumber gets produced, luber prices get higher or lumber productions profits get smaller, yes. Ideally it's a mix of the three.

But this isn't nearly as bad as you're making it sound. Lots of things used to be done by extremely low-wage workers or even slaves, and haven't gone away now that workers have to be paid better (or at all). Obviously many of those people are still paid very poorly and there's lots of work left to do there, but we improved things to a noticable extent and we didn't really suffer any bad effects. We can go further.

Well recognizing the problem is the first step, no? If you scroll up you'll see that this is what this was about. There are plenty of people who haven't even gotten that far and think supply and demand is the perfectly fine and the only option.

But sure, if you want, there are plenty of ways. Mandatory bonuses for higher-risk or generally physical labour would be one easy start, although it likely wouldn't be as effective in practice as one would like it to be. Restructuring the way people are paid as a whole is a more effective solution, which could cover other aspects too, although it would obviously be less popular with The Shareholders™ and therefore more difficult to pass. It's all a matter of legislation - every sane country has a law that says what the salary may or may not be based on, various limits (e.g. minimum wage), bonuses and modifiers... Maybe take inspiration from some countries' public sectors and make salaries fully standardized with a big lookup table and a bunch of modifiers based on objective or at least measurable parameters?

No?? I'm sorry but that's an insane comparison. We live in countries that have laws. Those laws are what applies the "law" of supply and demand to wages. We could alternatively have laws that say all human labor is paid equally per hour worked, or have a master table of types of work to monetary amounts, or some complex formula that takes various measurable factors into account.

I'm not saying any of those specific examples would be better than the current, but they're definitely options that exist and they're just words on a page passed by parliament, just like the current system is.

Hell, some of those things already exist in the public sector [0]. My base salary is calculated based on my job title and level of education, automatically adjusted with cost-of-living inflation, with modifiers for years of experience, job performance, being on-call, mentoring, working non-standard hours or weekends, dangerous conditions...

[0] I'm only familiar with some EU countries, not sure how this is done in the US or wherever else

This is not about abilities at all though, compensation shouldn't be tied to just "ability" either. My point is that it should to some extent depend on the risk a person takes on as well.

No matter how many people are are able and willing to do some "low-skill high-risk" work, their salary should reflect the fact they are taking on a risk. Taking that risk should be valued and rewarded by society.

This is not about equal outcomes, it's about fair compensation. If someone risks their life and damages their body in a mine every day, it's absurd and insulting that I make more than them sitting in an air-conditioned desk typing on a keyboard.