yubblegum

> And on page 11 — nestled between a winking anime woman and three yellow cats — was a suicide pledge.

Very curious is this pattern of infantilization and sensitive tech orgs and companies. It seems to have started around the dotcom boom-bust period. I remember when Google first came out with "Do no evil" and the primary colors and the whole cute cartoons, and all sorts of red flags went up for me. I truly wonder if somewhere the type of cognitive high performer coupled with requirement for being effectively chumps/controlable arrived at this formula.

you made me go search:

https://eu.36kr.com/en/p/3943024239344772

> There is no way to share a link to the comment AFAIK.

The comment's posted date link is the url for the comment (thread):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50418704

> They are going to study you for years.

Lol. Jensen Hueng's case was likely figured out in a smoke filled room somewhere in the bowels of some intelligence agency in China, agents passing around pictures of Jensen while puffing on cigarettes. One them tosses a picture on the table and just says 'he always wears that leather jacket'. The others nod, and one them sucks in the air while shaking the ashes into an ashtray, 'We have a few candidates in mind'.

The full 72 volumes of documents reconstructed from shredded US embassy documents in Tehran.

https://archive.org/details/DocumentsFromTheUSEspionageDen/D...

> Could shredded paper be reconstructed?

Apparently! Vol. 32 of above (per a spot check) has many docs that were shredded. My recommended method is to put papers in a bucket of liquid and then smush it. Good luck reconstructing that.

Heisenberg's humanity shines through in his written words in Reality and It's Order.

It is very upsetting that one of the most profound minds of 20th century and Germany, entirely in the tradition of Leibniz, Goethe, et al., is blackwashed because of the coincidence of existing during the Nazi regime.

(https://northtownbooks.com/book/9783030256951 << Recommended)

It's an attractive thought, this comparative look at FA and TM. However it is misleading to an extent.

A Turing Machine's capabilities exceed the FA's because it has a 'store of knowledge'. It is both recording and reading, repeatedly. There is erasure, too. So if we're aspiring to TM-hood, the guidance seems to be write, and re-read (your own thoughts), and re-evaluate, and re-write. This process is subject to the halting problem. /g

"[A]ny app with Full Disk Access" requires yours truly's personal approval.

You acknowledge the threat is real yet say it is "niche".

And frankly, given that Apple can not possibly 'iKnow' more about me than myself, it seems running your 'niche critical but whocares' python server can only be informative to potential 3rd parties locked out of my Apple machine because they do NOT have been give permission by me to have "Full Disk Access".

I wonder how many of this type are 'senior/principle software engineers' employed by our AI vendor overlords. This situation is the inevitable result of vocal VCs (ahem) poo pooing "age" and "experience" and promoting youth as a 'requirement' starting in the '00s, coupled with these same VCs now attempting to hijack an entire industry to run on their obviously immature and buggy and frankly possibly dangerous products.

The silver lining in all this is all of us very experienced "ancient" software practitioners will likely be in demand again. In a sane world, of course.

That is a categorical error.

My evil extension|browser may know what porn I watch or which sites I am visiting or possibly lift some bits it is not supposed to have. But it does not have access to Apple's comprehensive graph of my digital activities on their devices. Only Apple Inc. has that access.

So in fact the OP needs to put in the readme that "malicious browser extensions are a potential attack surface."

As a matter of fact, one could argue that a posting like this on Hackernews could potentially be a very sophisticated 'human engineering' effort by parties that have backdoors to browsers but have been defeated by Apple's security features.

> if that is true, you might have bigger problems than leaking the apple graph

That is certainly true, and it is equally true that that possibility places a responsibility on you to put that in a section in your readme.

So yeah, I may have a bad extension but that thing never had access to the possibly aptly named 'IntelligencePlatform' that's keeping tabs on my digital activities, until I ran your code. Correct?

Hi there. Thanks for this!

So my questions regarding security implications of running your code, my LLM friend reviewed the code and expressed possible concerns over (a) malicious browser extensions now get to see what they couldn't before; (b) you are not using https. There was bunch more but they can all be addressed on my end. Your thoughts?

> by Gödel there’s no upper bound to automation

At which point do you think the Human mind acting as the observer of the formal mechanism will be simply exhausted by the sheer scale of complexity? Theoretically there is no upper bound but practically?

(Don't mean to insert a pessimistic note here but genuinely curious to as your no-limits optimism)

How would it handle transitive cases?

> > Perhaps it's more important to trust the people who wrote the code

> Yeah... about that.

Well done. You presented a straw man and drag poor Ken into this, and then proceeded to burn it. +1. Yeah, it is precisely about the people behind the product. To wit, I may not have liked the Gophers but I did trust them to build a trustworthy compiler.

Unless you are building from source yourself that means exactly and precisely zip.

Why are you apologizing?

Your comment could be misread as rude by an insecure ("8 digit") person who read that as a challenge to their intelligence and skills, however the reply they gave to your comment is the very defition of rude.

Meet the "Simple Object Access Protocol": https://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/

The article says that a software engineer interviewed with the North Koreans and the NKs then gained access to engineer A's machine (which had the deployment token) and then finally passed that token to run on engineer C's machine (who apparently did deployments). They knew of the team makeup from their first (caught) attempt.

That unlettered (npi) engineer who downloaded and ran the interview software on his or her machine is what the human weak link here. Let's call them Engineer F. Seems like this person was specifically selected from the dev team.

congrats & just fyi, you should put a "Show HN" if you are posting and presenting your own handiwork. Better optics.

Some IoT providers' h/w products use globally viable sim cards that can connect to supporting networks. It doesn't have to be "open wifi" since a lot of IoT is for movable objects that are shipped around.

Imagine building such objects and a graceful website only to have the visitor be confronted with "Shit" right at the beginning. Try this Norway: 'Outhouse'.

No, determinism in this context clearly means precisely being 'predictable' as claimed that individual humans are predictable given sufficient observation.

He did self diagnose as "with seemingly no negative long-term consequences".

Watching porn at home and not wanting to see it in public space does not make one a 'hypcrite'.

> Might as well go as transgressive as possible while you still can.

This only computes in the mind of an national adversary that wants to see a society in chaos. No one in their right mind would want to "trangress" against their own society because of some political goal. Those that do are iirc are technically in the terrorist quadrant of 'protest'.

A person has what is known as 'character' and 'personality'. These words indicate discenable patterns of behavior. Determinism in this discussion means that a given person will 'behave in an expected manner'. Further feature of humans in that you can coerce them to behave in highly constrained manners.

Entire institutions and organizations in humanity are based on this feature of human beings.

A heuristic software agent that will respond in a spectrum of possible ways and past performance is no guarantee of future performance. It is no way reassuring that your agent has 'never done x' since if 'x is in the space of possible responses' it can certainly do 'x'.

Vendor A publishes a public key on their site for authenticating any signature. There is an entire subset of cryptography dedicated to addressing these needs. This is just yet another software player, Cursor, taking the absolutely easy no effort path because otherwise they would be, I don't know, "losers". I mean only losers would setup a basic authenticated provinance for bits of code they are pushing to the world to be executed by all and sundry. Really, this profession has become a complete clown show.

I find it entirely irrelevant that contemporary comments on emerging technology of photography may have in part worried about the future of representative arts. 19th century featured a lot of blowhard know nothing know it alls.

As for today, we are discussing distinct means of producing the same thing: software. Painting remains because photography was at most displacing a subset of the field. Generative AI writing software may be displacing an entire profession.