NegativeK

Only referencing America, but professional liability for doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc isn't based on perfection. It's based on a reasonable effort.

So Google could, for example, switch from a tiny "this could be wrong!" byline to having the AI be less overconfident every freaking time regardless of whether it's spouting made up crap or actual facts.

The scale doesn't sound like a way out. If your company expects to get away with doing the wrong thing where smaller companies can't, then the solution isn't to continue getting away with it.

Are "your guys" a guerrilla force or something?

Because the military doesn't give soldiers rifles with guard rails. They give the soldiers intense, rigid training, and then try to enforce discipline and correct use socially.

If an LLM is going to be important in that way (this seems like a very contrived way,) then it's in the interest of the LLM's host to make sure it doesn't have guard rails that would get in the way _that_ way.

There are simpler ways to disrupt a flight.

The vast majority of people aren't aware of open versus closed protocols. If enough people they want to communicate with are using it to counterbalance how frustrating it is, they'll use it. It happened because businesses realized there's profit in lock in, and they threw resources at it.

Open protocols are still there and still used, but we're sad because the smaller userbase is frustrating. Just like how people still publish human written content to personal blogs, but they're proportionally non-existent.

That's the past.

Why does Google think it's a good idea to make that the case even if you don't block their crawlers?

A not thoroughly thought out response:

Those people would heavily incentivized to protect their ability to vote.

If you sell something to someone and they do computer crimes, you're going to have to prove that you couldn't've known that they're a computer crimer.

It's the same thing with selling general offensive security tools. You have to proactively make it clear that it's for testing and not criminal use. Otherwise, cops are going to assume you're complicit and make things shitty.

I don't think that using LLMs for medicine is an appropriate fix for the US's healthcare issues.

Unless healthcare businesses decide to improve patient care with AI instead of increasing patients per day, I think it's going to make things even worse.

Calling people dogs by analogy is not great.

That aside, corporations and groups don't make decisions. People do. We can understand and empathize with what led them to that decision (and sometimes we might be looking at the wrong person), but they're still responsible.

As other commenters pointed out, rubber/plastics fail.

Littmann sells repair kits.

Bike lanes exist to protect cyclists from drivers and to limit how cyclists affect the flow of traffic. Cars stopping in the bike lane shit all over that, just like they would if they parked on the sidewalk.

I wish drivers (and now leaders of a company) would have more empathy toward people on the road that can be squashed like a bug.

Your points seem focused on the bottom line and short term extraction of labor from employees, versus actually building a long-term community of healthy, productive people.

Like this:

> will start making people think more about counting exact hours they’re working. It’s partially why the “4 10s” concept is also a bad idea that permeates the defense contractors.

Maybe that's a good thing? [1]

I have no doubt that Meta is thinking like your four points and hiding behind "it's the corporation making the decisions, not a bunch of people at high levels", but... Ugh.

[1] Nitpick - I was speaking to a friend about a decade ago regarding their OT/IOT work in the defense industry, and they told me that they had to aggressively track every hour. The feds were punitive when it came to unreported overtime.

Doctors are continually interviewed every time a patient gets pissed and sues them or files a board complaint. If there's any fault they're (very publicly) assigned remedial training or put on a PIP. They're also in incredibly high demand, so its often the doctor interviewing the practice.

If the interview is for becoming a partner at a practice, it's a two way courtship that's more reminiscent of other businesses looking for a co-owner.

Doctors also tend to hear about each other. Even in decent sized metro areas, they can often know who to avoid.

(This process isn't perfect, but it's still way different than for software.)

If I had a roommate who spent huge swaths of our monthly budget on house cleaning we didn't need, I might tell them to go find another place to live.

Or to stop stretching metaphors.. The investors should be mad that the layoffs were even necessary.

We should be encouraging those users to switch to a password manager.

The defender must be right every single time, and the attacker right only once.

Until the attacker has initial access.

Then the attacker needs to be right every single time.

> Particularly since so many companies don't even know all of the OSS they are using, and they often use OSS to offload the cost of maintaining it themselves.

Companies that market to the EU are going to need to find out real fast.

My experience with lawyers helping me respond to other lawyers is "Stop interacting with that person".

Unless I'm spending way more money, I'd expect any company to fire me as a client as fast as legally possible if I threatened them with a lawyer.

Make HIPAA include PII.

That hits your toxic waste goal real fast.

The sign won't be "don't do mass surveillance".

It'll be "make money off mass surveillance, but don't get caught like Flock did."

I think maybe we should listen to the lawyers here.

The tension is that people start with writing code to scratch an itch and share it freely. Every bit of community management pulls away from sitting down and coding a personal project. Even accepting the free work of others.

There are people who like doing both, but someone publishing their code online doesn't imply that. And it certainly doesn't imply that they hate democracy.

Anyone who assumes they won't be fooled is setting themselves up for disaster.

The biggest of Musk's warning signs, for me, was the hype. Hype can drown out valid criticism. When the hype is big enough, valid criticism ends up being drowned out by rage based, critical rhetoric that's in a screaming match with proponents.

(The worst part about being hype averse is that I can end up averse to legitimately exciting things.)

I certainly thought I was smarter when I was younger.

AI is maximizing the move fast and break things approach, including not asking for permission from its userbase.

It's consistent with believing that AI is the future -- if a company doesn't perform really well, it loses that race. And if the userbase they piss off is also the userbase that's skeptical about AI, then they're not pissing off anyone that's relevant to the company winning.

Downside: Pissing off users is gross.

By migrating to another code forge and paying them so they're sustainable.

Which doesn't answer your question at all, but it is the metric they'll pay attention to. And it is the the thing that actually addresses the underlying problem.

>> hobby

> You don't have to support

This isn't just a kernel thing. Expecting volunteers to dump time into compliance is ridiculous. Not because they oppose the idea, but because huge swaths of the internet run on people doing something for free -- and they'll just do something else if governments begin threatening them.

Europe realized this with their new infosec liability regulations. If you're giving your labor away, you're not liable for your software; if you're making money off your software, step up and do better. Maybe California and the others should learn more from the EU.

Abortion prosecution or societal ostracization.

Streamer doxing.

Literally just being trans.

HIV fear mongering.

Illegal fuckery with your insurance rates.

Employment discrimination.

Stalking.

Racial discrimination.

Can you imagine trying to fully trust a mental health professional today? A patient can't see a therapist's notes, but they sure as hell can be breached.

There is zero LEGITIMATE use for your breached health data.

The business owner is in a job that takes a huge amount of their life, with a suicide rate four times higher than average.

People accuse veterinarians of being in it for the money, the same day another owner decides to euthanize their dog because they don't want it anymore. While an angry owner on social media is rallying pitchforks over something that the vet can't even respond to due to privacy standards.

I have no sympathy for PE that's wandering around our lives, destroying the actual purpose of businesses to extract profit from everyone they can.

CLAs have a use beyond shitty anti-open source rug pulls, but they've been abused enough that I'll trust the FSF first.

And I fully acknowledge that the FSF isn't and will never be perfect.

> The tech companies don't really have any issue paying

It reduces profit.