peppermint_gum

What makes you think that it's "so damn hackable"?

Also, this particular attack requires administrator privileges and bypasses a security boundary that doesn't even exist on e.g. Linux. Linux doesn't have driver signatures and root can easily install a new kernel module.

>It's simple. Human writing is short and to the point (either because they're lazy or want to save the reader's time), yet still manages to capture your attention. AI writing tends to be too elaborate and lacks a sense of "self".

Corporate (and SEO) writing has always been overly verbose and tried to sound fancy. In fact, this probably is where LLMs learned that style. There's no reliable heuristic to tell human- and AI-writing apart.

There's a lot of worry about people being fooled by AI fakes, but I'm also worried about false positives, people seeing "AI" everywhere. In fact, this is already happening in the art communities, with accusations flying left and right.

People are too confident in their heuristics. "You are using whole sentences? Bot!" I fear this will make people simplify their writing style to avoid the accussations, which won't really accomplish anything, because AIs already can be prompted to avoid the default word-salad style.

I miss the time before LLMs...

Then I'm not sure what you mean by "deterrence". Both of the linked articles argue against increasing the severity of punishment, but they also say that the certainty of getting caught is a strong deterrent.

This doesn't seem to be in conflict with what the GP said ("supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively"). It seems to me that many people have a problem with thieves not being punished at all.

> AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime,

Could you share some of this evidence?

This is a spam video composed of stock footage. It doesn't add any new information, it shows some random wasp species, unrelated to the ones just discovered, and some random scientists (possibly actors).

Yeah, OP is overly dramatic, Reddit has technical issues all the time.

So we shouldn't make it easier for people to meet each other, because some of those people might be white supremacists?

I'm sorry, but I think you may be spending too much time online.

>not even considering some hostile emails that I recently received from the upstream developer or his public rants on lkml and reddit

It feels like whenever the author of bcachefs comes up, it's always because of some drama.

Just the other day he clashed with Linus Torvalds: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wj1Oo9-g-yuwWuHQZU8v=VAsB...

My reading is that he's very passionate, so he wants to "move fast and break things" and doesn't get why the others aren't necessarily very happy about it.

Swift's LLVM fork is open-source, just not upstreamed. No Free Software license requires forks to upstream their changes.

https://github.com/swiftlang/llvm-project

One thing I don't understand about Swift is why it uses a private fork of LLVM. Why can't they upstream whatever changes they need?

This is not the first time this has happened.

Back in 2019, many outlets[1] reported that Putin was still using Windows XP. Why? Because in a publicity photo, the taskbar on his computer had a blueish color. And some people even came up with theories like "it's because it's the last version that hasn't been backdoored".

The problem is that this isn't true. If you look at the photo in full resolution[2], it's clear that it was Windows 7 (or maybe even 8 with a Start menu mod).

[1] - For example: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7800831/Vladimir-Pu...

[2] - http://static.kremlin.ru/media/events/photos/big2x/W2kaDAtDz...

I'm also interested in learning about it. I've only found this thread on Twitter: https://x.com/virtuallyfun/status/1804913568820699549

Apparently there are all kinds of goodies in that dump, like previously unknown betas of MS-DOS and OS/2, but there are no links to the dump itself. It's a shame that the community is so secretive about this :(

>There will be four ways in which ISA systems will work to slow the vehicle down, and it will be up to the manufacturers to pick which one they want to use. The EU regulations permit a system that can use a cascaded acoustic warning, a cascaded vibrating warning, an accelerator pedal with haptic feedback, or a speed control function in which the speed of the vehicle will be gradually reduced.

This is more like a "speed warner" than a "speed limiter".

This could have been AMD, but they choose to sabotage themselves with half-baked APIs that don't even support all of their GPUs. Hell, ROCm didn't even support Windows until recently.

Frankly, it's shocking how bad they are at it.

This person's entire argument is that the (A)GPL is "viral", and therefore companies have no right to relicense the software they own the copyright for, and they should be sued.

He doesn't quote any specific part of the (A)GPL that supports his argument (frankly, I doubt he's ever read it), he just keeps throwing out the buzzword "viral" as if it means anything. He clearly doesn't understand the concept of CLAs and copyright law in general.

This is a very bad post, and I'm surprised it made the front page.

I don't understand why anyone would see dropping RISC-V support as a move against China. Chinese companies have their fingers in a lot of pies.

They're mainly invested in the ARM ecosystem, companies such as Allwinner, HiSilicon, Rockchip and UNISOC are very successful in this market. They also make x86 CPUs (Zhaoxin) and have developed their own domestic MIPS-derived architecture (LoongArch).

My takeaway from the article is that junior developers are intimidated by stacktraces.

I don't know, it's hard to tell because the video is heavily compressed. Even at 2160p the compression artifacts are huge.

This post makes it seem as if the NSA produced some kind of comprehensive review of programming languages which showed that Delphi is memory safe.

No, what actually happened is they published a short 7-page blurb[1] and it mentions Delphi in a single sentence: "Some examples of memory safe languages are Python, Java, C#, Go, Delphi/Object Pascal, Swift, Ruby, Rust, and Ada."

It's just a single sentence. It doesn't elaborate what specific features of those languages make them memory safe.

Delphi (and Ada) were most likely included on this list by mistake. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a result of some intern googling "memory safe languages".

These two languages are not memory safe. They don't have a garbage collector, borrow checker, or any other equivalent mechanism that eliminates memory errors. They both use manual memory management, which can be partially automated with RAII, just like C++.

[1] - https://media.defense.gov/2023/Apr/27/2003210083/-1/-1/0/CSI...

>But usually it’s a misunderstanding of what derivative works are. E.g building an extension to a GPL app. Many don’t believe that simply importing a GPL Python module is enough to make your extension have to comply to GPL.

The GPL doesn't explicitly define the concept of derivative work. The FSF's interpretation is that linking creates a derivative work, but there's no universal consensus among lawyers on this issue.

LWN has an article that presents a few different views on this topic: https://lwn.net/Articles/548216/

>Windows XP is the last version of Windows that's generally thought to be free of backdoors and US spyware. This is possibly why Putin seems to still use it

Despite every major news outlet reporting this back in 2019, this is actually fake news. People saw that the taskbar appeared blue in a low-res photo, and concluded that it must be Windows XP. Very sloppy journalism.

If you look at the full-resolution version of that 2019 photo, it's clear that it's Windows 7 (or maybe 8 with a Start menu mod): http://static.kremlin.ru/media/events/photos/big2x/W2kaDAtDz...

>There must be a more rational reason than that. I've not heard anything better than legal reasons. But do correct me if I'm wrong. I've worked in big companies, and patents can be a show stopper. Seems like a plausible theory (i.e. not a conspiracy theory)

In your first comment, you stated as a fact that "lawyers pulled the emergency brakes". Despite literally no one from Google ever saying this, and Google giving very different reasons for the removal.

And now you act as if something you made up in your mind is the default theory and the burden of proof is on the people disagreeing with you.

>To fix this, you'd need to convince Google, and other large companies that would be exposed to law suits related to these patents (Apple, Adobe, etc.), that these patent holders are not going to insist on being compensated.

Apple has implemented JPEG XL support in macOS and iOS. Adobe has also implemented support for JPEG XL in their products.

Also, if patents were the reason Google removed JXL from Chrome, why would they make up technical reasons for doing so?

Please don't present unsourced conspiracy theories as if they were confirmed facts.

In other words, there's no source.

On most forums there's no automated system that automatically shadowbans users for using a blacklisted IP.

They also don't quietly remove comments in a way that is invisible to a user for triggering some keyword in AutoModerator or a spam filter. And there are usually no minimum karma or account age requirements for posters.

AMD clearly believes that this newfangled "GPU compute" fad will pass soon, so there's no point to invest in it.

This is one of the worst acts of self-sabotage I have ever seen in the tech business.

It doesn't seem it's new. The release notes for the 511.79 driver from February 2022 say the same thing:

https://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/511.79/511.79-win11-w...

>There's a pretty decent chance nobody else is actually trying. The only other OS getting installed is Windows, and that's probably coming straight from a disk image or a recovery partition.

From TFA: "Note: At this point, I checked that Windows and various other UEFI tools are able to read the variables just fine, so Linux’ output is confirmed to be incorrect."

Being an expert doesn't necessarily make you a good debater. Debates aren't about who's "right", they're about who has made a more convincing argument.

The article used alternative history cranks as an example of someone good at conjuring up seemingly convincing arguments, despite being pretty much the opposite of an expert.

One aspect of the spread of LLMs is that we have lost a useful heuristic. Poor spelling and grammar used to be a signal used to quickly filter out worthless posts.

Unfortunately, this doesn't work at all for AI-generated garbage. Its command of the language is perfect - in fact, it's much better than that of most human beings. Anyone can instantly generate superficially coherent posts. You no longer have to hire a copywriter, as many SEO spammers used to do.

curl's struggle with bogus AI-generated bug reports is a good example of the problems this causes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38845878

This is only the beginning, it will get much worse. At some point it may become impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff.