cecilkorik

Who says the community won’t choose the same as you? And if they don’t, are you really sure you want or need that community? Move forward with the people who agree with you, don’t covet the ones who don’t. If your ideas and differences which are driving you to fragment the community are not aligned with the community as it stands, yes they might end up lonely and unpopular, and that might just be because they’re not compelling ideas or they’re not offering anything that most people want or are interested in. Inertia is not necessarily a bad thing, it’s just how the laws of physics work.

It’s your premise people are disagreeing with, not your proposal. You have created a proposal to fix something most people don’t see as being a legitimate problem. There’s nothing to discuss or improve, the disagreement is more fundamental than that. You haven’t successfully argued that there is a real problem in the first place.

If you want to convince people your way is better, you probably have to implement it and show them it’s better.

(Spoiler alert: It probably isn’t better. It’s one of those “sounds great in theory, sucks shit in practice” ideas, I think it will be taken advantage of and turn toxic very quickly.)

They only actually get into details like that that at the post-graduate level, but if you read between the lines carefully enough it’s already implied by “however you please”.

No, Trump will teach sex education and consent.

I can already teach his class for him. Here is how civil rights work, courtesy of Clarence Thomas:

1. Get invited to the supreme court.
2. You get to decide what civil rights are, and what they aren’t.
3. Make them up as you go, however you please.

That’s clearly what he’s learned from his own experiences, it would be dishonest for him to teach anything else.

what I’m taking away from this is we need to make a lot more people terminally online. /s

The AIs they created were and are also basically the largest scale of fraud ever perpetrated on the people of the world. They told us it was intelligent. They told us it was super-intelligence. They told us it was conscious. They told us it was learning on their own. They told us it could do anything we ever dreamed of. They told us it would do all our jobs. They told us it was dangerous. They told us it could destroy the world. They told us that our enemies would use it. They told us it would accelerate exponentially. They told us it was the future.

It was all a scam, a disingenuous, dishonest fraud to bilk investors, governments, and ultimately the people of the world out of money that could’ve saved, fed, clothed, housed, healed, protected and supported millions, money that could’ve been used to slow down climate change, money that could’ve been used to deliver justice. Instead used to pile electronics into huge concrete boxes so they can burn fossil fuels for no good reason using loans to cover the losses of actually providing the services just so the illusion of these things being useful can be maintained. The money was just burned, tossed into jet turbines and turned into greenhouse gases and nothing else of value. Instead of helping with climate change, they contributed to it. For nothing. For selfish, myopic, temporary vanity.

We will never get that money back. We should try to claw it back from the crooks and the liars who took it, but I’m not naive, it won’t work. They will not make amends. They won’t be punished, not meaningfully. They are too big to fail. The economic growth must go on, no matter how fictional. The money is gone. And a big chunk of our future with it.

What a waste.

I love NoFX.

I would say I would never buy a Ferrari (which is true anyway) but I also wouldn’t consider that to even qualify as actual ownership, so even if I did pay for one, I still wouldn’t be willing to call it “buying”.

The internet remembered back in those days ironically because stuff was harder to get and less accessible. People downloaded stuff because they weren’t sure when they might be on a slow connection or not have a connection at all, and once it was downloaded, it would sit there collecting dust until someone realized that it had vanished from its original source and like a hydra, two people who downloaded it would later upload it again. Always-online broadband and streaming basically killed that whole mentality. People just assume it will always be available from the original source… until it isn’t, and then it’s too late.

Electing some natives to high offices like New Mexico did is a good start, as long as it’s not done blindly. Power corrupts and they’re just as corruptible as any other human beings are. It’s about deeds, not words, but even dishonest words often contain red flags warning of future deeds. Don’t feel too bad if you get scammed by any given politician, they’re crafty devils, but it doesn’t matter how regularly or how badly you get scammed by the best of them, you’ve still got a responsibility to try to figure out which ones have some truth and respectability left in them.

I think there is some confusion and potential for misinformation here. SSH in key-only mode (common configuration) protects you from this problem, because it never accepts or even attempts any passwords at all, regardless of length. SSH in password-allowed mode with at least one user who might be a key-only USER by merit of having a password hash of “*” (not a valid password hash) is a prerequisite for this. That is a very different and very common thing, as most systems come with at least one key-only user by default. But gaining access to that user with an incorrect, invalid password still requires having passwords enabled at all.

To be clear: Password access enabled is a prerequisite, and by extension, password access disabled (key-only) prevents this.

The website you linked clearly defines that all of these conditions must be true for you to be vulnerable, and as far as I can tell, it is exactly correct:

is your sshd running on musl? (alpine, openwrt, buildroot, yocto)
is it not using pam? alpine’s openssh-server doesn’t by default, or maybe you set UsePAM no
are password logins still on? they are by default
is there an account with just * as its password? key-only users, ldap users, root on alpine
and some other account with a real password?

then that * account takes any password between 257 and 1024 characters

The * account which they suggest potentially being “key only” is the prerequisite you are talking about, but having SSH itself key-only (which is best practice anyway) prevents the attack entirely.

Open weight models cannot do this, they do not have any funding. If you demand this, you are just demanding that there will never be any open models, that proprietary AI models controlled by massive trillion dollar corporations will be the only models available, and frankly the cure is worse than the disease.

It’s also impractical, like closing the gate after the horses have already gone. Open-weight, unethically trained models are already out there. They are not going away. You cannot put the genie back in the bottle. They will never earn any money, so they will never be able to compensate for the training that was done to create them, unless you consider the fact that they exist, and they are open to anybody, as at least some measure of compensation.

It’s not enough compensation, but it is something. The training was certainly unethical, but so is an economic system that requires intellectual property to be transactional. Why fix one unethical thing while keeping and reinforcing another?

The only sensible and reasonable way to resolve the issue in the long term is for significant government support and patronage of the arts and content creators (and ideally all people) to be established. People who do this for a living are providing valuable service to all of humanity and that deserves to be recognized not by transactional, metered capitalism that defines each piece of art or content in terms of its raw economic value (a system easily and frequently corrupted anyway if you look at the prevalence of theft, forgery, fraud and money-laundering in the high art world), but by guaranteeing a comfortable and dignified life that allows creative people to freely create the art or other works they love and feel passionate about without worrying that they’re going to starve to death or be forced into a dead-end job if they’re not economically successful.

Yeah, perception is unfortunately more important than truth. With a functioning government and legal system we could at least try to fight against such misleading political activities but those institutions have been so extensively undermined I’m not sure if they’re even really still standing or if they’re just floating in the air waiting for gravity to notice there’s nothing still holding them up.

Using infinite money for political actions is protected as free-speech now, thanks to the Citizens United decision in 2010. That’s a huge part of where this all went really badly wrong. It was not the first nail in the coffin, it was more like a railroad spike. And the fascism express is coming through, right on time. All aboard!

Well, it’s like I told my old friend Einstein, everything’s relative!

Technically nuclear came from a different star. The sun won’t create those kinds of heavier elements until it burns through its hydrogen and helium fuel to start fusing its way up to lead, and I don’t think it’s massive enough to actually reach the kind of supernova collapse required to smash lesser elements together into heavier elements than that in any significant amount. So technically, fission is the only the form of energy that isn’t based on solar. It’s just the still-cooling-embers leftover from someone else’s dying star, a whole bunch of billions of years ago. I guess you could say the sun’s gravity at least attracted it all into this general vicinity though, at least until the Earth’s own gravity started pulling its own weight.

The gap may be huge morally but it’s very narrow in practice. The problem is that general purpose includes any purpose, including murder. It’s rather different from airborne drones because it can be much stealthier and can simply move into position in advance, wait in silence and strike without warning and like drones it is effectively disposable so there would be very little form of effective defense against such tactics deployed at scale, but qualitative differences like that aren’t really the main point we should be concerned about. The point is, we cannot ignore the extreme, profound danger these technologies pose to the protection and continued functioning of human civilization simply because it is not designed for it. It may be too late to stop it completely, but that’s absolutely no excuse for leaving it unchecked and allowing it to run rampant.

Nuclear weapons technology never stopped developing, but as humans, we all agreed it was too dangerous to let proliferate freely, and we have kept it in check and so far managed to avoid annihilating ourselves with it. It may not be the greatest success story, but it is the best we’ve been able to do, and there’s no reason not to keep trying, if the alternative is annihilation, and I believe in both cases it is.

Are they actually radiation-hardened though? My understanding was that robots for radioactive work tend to be extremely simplistic because of that limitation, and you probably don’t want a radioactive particle flipping a bit that makes the dog decide now would be a great time to do a backflip into the spent fuel pool.

Does that mean we can start calling them “death merchants” again?