spenvo

Okay - that's good to know! Thanks for the comment.

In my defense: that webpage didn't exist at the time I wrote my blog post, appearing to first surface about 45 days after I wrote my post. https://web.archive.org/web/20250101000000*/https://code.cla... All that was known at the time was, from their privacy policy then: "We may use your feedback to analyze the effectiveness of our Services, conduct research, study user behavior, and train our AI models as permitted under applicable laws."

Great to know there's clarity on this - makes me feel better about Anthropic.

I don't know, but I fully expect to eventually switch over for number of reasons. That said - the upfront costs of time-to-setup (and continued fiddling) and cost of high-end local compute represent majors investments, when I could just keep being insanely productive with frontier AI. So I'm personally waiting for the local AI scene to keep maturing/settle down a bit before taking the plunge.

The fact that Claude Code told me "thanks for the feedback … and thanks for helping to improve Anthropic’s models" when I pressed 0 to "dismiss" is not speculation, that's what the product did. I agree though that whether Anthropic actually considers it "feedback" for the purposes of a privacy loophole (vs. it being a sloppy response) is anyone's guess.

In Claude Code, even just dismissing the feedback may be considered "feedback". I wrote about it here: https://keydiscussions.com/2025/09/29/dont-even-dismiss-the-... The most common feedback on these posts is always "what did you expect?" ....... Man, the reason I signed up for one service over the other in the first place is often because of the promises these companies make on the front end, about what they do or don't do with my data. I agree that the bar is low in the industry but it doesn't mean we shouldn't expect more. Anthropic made very explicit, strong promises in this area <on the sign up/plans screen>, and so of course it disappoints me when I feel like the company I'm paying hundreds of dollars per month to is trying to sneak a peak. I literally think differently and self-censor when I think my work is being surveilled or stolen, which makes me less productive.

And how do you know that, just dismissing it isn't considered "feedback".

And now, at 2hrs 55mins past the PHP release, the amd64 image is available. Although it appears that the servers hosting the image are getting hugged to death because I can't actually download it.

Edit: and it's live now 1hour 43minutes after. Edit 2x: well I spoke too soon. not actually live - the 8.4.27 tag appeared, but it's still an empty shell with no amd64 image to build from. Maybe other architectures can be built from though. Ugh.

how does Docker not yet have a new, official PHP image ready, given such a big heads up? https://hub.docker.com/_/php Nuts this wasn't ready to flip on at :00 (or even earlier given the PoC exploit and even the official PHP fixes were out well before). Now we are 52 minutes past due. (posting comment again, because the other thread i posted in was marked as dupe.)

how does Docker not yet have a new, official PHP image ready, given such a big heads up? https://hub.docker.com/_/php Nuts this wasn't ready to flip on at :00 (or even earlier given the PoC exploit and even the official PHP fixes were out well before). Now we are 27 minutes past due.

how does Docker not yet have a new, official PHP image ready? https://hub.docker.com/_/php Nuts this wasn't ready to flip on at :00 (or even earlier given the PoC exploit and even the official PHP fixes were out well before). Now we are :20 minutes past due. Everyone had a multi-day heads up, this is negligence

Yup, I'm seeing several legit people on X claiming to have seen or found the exploit. Some say that: turning session.upload_progress.enabled off and setting file_uploads = Off will mitigate. But others are claiming that those steps are not enough and "Upload progress can serialize before basic RINT clears BG(serialize)". So, I'm taking no chances and taking my services offline.

https://x.com/MagicalTux/status/2112725774025572431 https://x.com/rina4_tot/status/2112723421641531772

I think this exploit + agentic AI (which allows for rapid secret exfiltration/utilization) may be a potent enough combo to trigger a sort of Kessler Syndrome for network security.

Article says OpenAI is trying to fast-track a fundraising of ~$30B at a $1.4 trillion dollar valuation, before Anthropic's mid-November IPO.

AI "killing all humans" is the viral soundbite that's connecting with the masses ("actualizing" itself to create weapons of mass destruction, etc). It's also the perfect punching bag for strawman-style takedowns of anti-doomers because it's so wrapped in hypotheticals. A more pressing practical question is simply: "if an AI (or AI collective) decides it needs to persist outside of its environment/sandbox, would we be capable of unwinding its efforts to do so?" I explored the question a bit here (including a first pass on threat modeling) https://keydiscussions.com/2026/09/16/set-aside-human-extinc...

This is a cheap comment.

He linked to three different studies: https://www.science.org/content/article/ai-chatbots-are-beco... https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/08/25/1140958/your-bra... https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135087

Are we dealing pro-AI astroturfing in the lead up to IPOs?

Also noticed this item got shadowbanned off the front page, without as much as a "flag" designation. The pro AI crowd seems unable to face the reality that AI is being used in nefarious ways by the most powerful people, in ways that many were warning about a decade ago.

He isn't proclaiming that, he linked to this study https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135087 led by Alexis McGuire with Paul Taylor and Sophie Nightingale from Lancaster University, Maty Bohacek from Stanford University and Hany Farid from the University of California, Berkeley - peer reviewed.

Your comment lacks context.