pms

That's clearly not the message, the author writes at the top:

> You should patch your servers anyway. There is a real vulnerability here, but exploiting it is significantly harder than people are making it out to be.

The take-home message is about human herding behavior being reinforced by LLM use:

> There's something important to be said here about how many people have Claude/GPT make design decisions for them, and how AI is the primary decision maker in the world right now. You've got this bizarre case of "Decision Schelling Points" where a method of solving a problem is extremely overrepresented, because it's what Claude does out of the box.

Ad hominem attacks on HN, at the top of a comment thread, just because LLMs were criticized by a human. Welcome to the new age.

But it can be detected by using the model. Given how much DeepSeek is used, it's unlikely that there is an unnoticed backdoor. That said, I agree it'd be good to test models for such backdoors.

Isn't this a misuse of the word steelman, because it wasn't accompanied by the criticism?

From Google Search overview box:

> To steelman means to build the strongest, most charitable version of an opposing argument—even better than the way your opponent stated it—before you criticize or reply to it. It is the exact opposite of a strawman, which is when you intentionally weaken or misrepresent someone's view to make it easy to knock down.

They fear open-weight models, not because of the emergence of superinteligence, but because open-weight models will eat their profit margins.

It's simpler than this. They don'y fear their own AI, but rather open-weight models. Not because of superinteligence, but because open-weight models will eat their profit margins.

Are we reading the same article (page 3)?

ChatGPT has this option "Improve the model for everyone" in user preferences, which comes with the attached description, meaning that training on user data can be deactivated:

> Allow your content to be used to train our models, which makes ChatGPT better for you and everyone who uses it. We take steps to protect your privacy. Learn more

The "Learn more" link takes you to the link you've shared.

I'm speechless...

You just need a well-isolated house, which are rare in the US, but common in Europe. A well-isolated house doesn't warm up as much on a hot day, unless you open windows wide. Temperature outside can be 35 Celsius, inside <25 Celsius.

Personally, I much prefer this solution than ACs, because ACs sometimes affect my throat and make me feel tired.

That's an "overthinking" model.

Just like Trump sincerely believed he won the 2020 election.

By buying US products, using US-based media, and adopting US narratives? That's a part of the problem. This world is lacking multilateralism.

I really hope they go ahead and create the portal. I mean it.

It's a waste of resources, but please do it! The entire "European Union censors" narrative is a hoax [1], so the portal will achieve nothing, but you've got to do what you've got to do!

[1] First, the EU countries have much higher World Press Freedom Index than the US. Second, once you start reading how little there is of the alleged "censorship" in the EU, you realize it's a no-brainer aiming to protect people.

Unable? :-D

> For the most part, sexy never left, and statistics bear this out

Recently I've seen a figure in a reputable source showing that people tend to have less sex than ~20-30 years ago (even if we just look at married couples).

Clearly US Republicans, Russia, and Israel drive a push towards nationalism. Republicans and Elon Musk openly campaign for far-right European parties like AfD. You're getting causality wrong, or just don't want to recognize it, because the reality (rightfully) isn't as motivating as your image of it -- at least it shouldn't, but do you care?

No, that's not what I want. I want platform transparency and accountability.

Meanwhile, you're giving yourself the right to talk lies about me without my consent when I kindly ask you not to do that. Who acts here like an authoritarian?

Also, there are already authorities you describe, and they can do whatever they want without any oversight: the platforms.

I do think Europe should become more self-reliant. I also work a lot and rarely take any vacation time, but I don't see any sense -- except for egoism -- in working so much just to spread more AI slop online, mislead and polarize societies, or support a genocide. I think Europe has learned its lesson during the World Wars.

Agreed that's inconsistent and not ok. We need rules, procedures, and systems that apply equally to different sides.

Please elaborate.

I'd say that's fine. That's a great opportunity for the EU to develop its industry.

That's exactly the reason why we need platform transparency and accountability regulation like the EU's DSA.

Did you read the article? X was first to be accused by the EU Commission.

Please don't put your words in my mouth. You can speak only for yourself. And, frankly, it's not ok to write false information about a person you don't know.

Yes, which is why we need to balance who has power, and facilitate independent research, rather than to give away to either industry or government.

That's not clear to me at all. Would you mind elaborating?

No researcher will request or get access to "5 million Facebook logins" through the DSA, since such a request wouldn't comply with the DSA requirements, so your point is moot. In fact, we live in a quite different world than you imagine. Currently, researchers don't even have access to the public data, as the article points out. When it comes to private data, researchers won't get access to private messages either, but rather to aggregate-level privacy-preserving data (assuming that the DSA isn't killed before any of this happens by the industry and Republicans, which you seem to advocate for).

I'm very curious why this is downvoted. Would any of the down-voters mind elaborating?