Re: Software Vendors Are The Tip Of The Iceberg!
> some of that does have repercussions elsewhere in the world. .
Not much longer. The USA is becoming more irrelevant every day.
160 publicly visible posts • joined 8 Nov 2010
Picking locks is ‘easy’ if you are intelligent enough to to understand the principles, and you put in some time and effect to learning the skills required, and are prepared to take instruction from some who knows more that you about a subject.
That pretty much excludes the criminal population.
LLM inference training is by its very nature lossy, and as a result LLM generated code quality is significantly poorer than the average quality of the code used to train it.
This would normally be a concern , however for Microsoft, below average probably represents a huge increase in code quality, going by the number of critical flaws patched every single month. I can see why they are so keen on it.
> A single licensing charge
Why would it be a single licensing charge? An ongoing monthly royalty payment for any creator whose works have been used for training would be a far fairer method. And the creator should be able to set whatever fee they wish, or have their works removed from the training data.
This would obviously require some independent compliance monitoring, the first step in which is for a list of all the LLM training data used to train a model to be made public. The fact that Open AI and others are desperate to advise such scrutiny tells us all we need to know about the legitimacy of their use of data.
Not really. As surmised clearly in the post titled "It's the LLM training", you get better responses from being polite to AI because statistically, data scraped from polite, intelligent queries and replies are much more likely to be helpful and correct than rude and curt replies.
Therefore polite queries will weigh stochastic AI responses towards better, more accurate answers. A single query with a useful response from the AI is less wasteful than multiple attempts that do not get a useful response. So being polite is environmentally friendly, in so far as any use of AI can be.
Given how frequeny Google drop side-line services and products without any consideration whatsoever for the users, I suspect this is not being fixed out of the goodness of their hearts, but because it runs afoul of deliberate obsolescence laws. The device may be out of warranty, but it's still illegal to have a kill-switch deliberately break your device after a certain period, which is exactly what this amounts to.
The guy was caught red-handed, so the physical security wasn’t all that bad. If he had legitimate physical access before, there are a lot of ways he could have disabled locks or copied keys he wasn’t supposed to have. So firing the head of security is a bit pointless, as any replacement may well be worse. At least the current security team have learned a valuable lesson about the dangers of inside sabotage.
"Chase takes its responsibility to combat fraud seriously and prioritises protecting the firm and its customers to make the banking system safer," the bank said in the court filings.
Well that’s clearly not true, they obviously don’t take fraud seriously or this would not have been allowed to happen.
>Does anyone expect Russia to allow NATO nukes to be installed along its border?
Yet somehow it was perfectly ok for Russia to install nukes in Ukraine when it had a Russian-aligned government? Right on Europes border?
Your protestations are nonsense if you cannot acknowledge the sheer hypocrisy this stance.
> If only I could understand why 23kg of 'luggage' costs half the price of 15kg of 'sporting equipment' (aka my paraglider)…
Essentially, because Ryanair figure that if you are a paraglider, then you have a bit more dosh than the average punter, and they can wring you for a bit extra profit. Squeezing customers until the pips squeak for ‘extras’ like using the toilet is Ryanair’s whole business model.
> The US government lately has been hammering on this theme, with support from leading tech firms and non-profit initiatives to rewrite critical open source projects and components in Rust.
No, they haven’t. They have been hammering on the theme of using memory-safe languages in general, one of which they mentioned is Rust.
This kind of Rust-hype is likely to cause resistance to Rust, not promote it.
I would imagine that it’s not an unwillingness to learn something new , just a judgement on the effort vs value of learning Rust in particular. Rust is new, not widely adopted, and as a kernel language unproven. Compared to applying that time and effort into improving the current C++ code, it’s not a given that learning Rust is of value ton Linux kernel dev.
The push for incorporating Rust code into the Linux kernel seems to be as much ( if not more) about promoting Rust as it is about improving the Linux kernel.
Beyond that, what really horrified me is what seems to be a complete lack of any crash log checking and safe rollback.
If you are messing around with your customers critical systems at a privileged kernel level, there’s an absolute duty to have a watchdog monitor that’ checks your drivers crash logs and safety rolls back any updates, before any such updates are loaded again.
There seems to have been a complete lack of any such function. At the very least, I hope that Microsoft revoke their boot-driver flag privilege, as Crowdstrike have not taken their duty to do no harm seriously enough.
“ Last year, Meta's chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun, said regulating foundation models was effectively regulating research and development. "
This would be the same Meta that just settled with the Texas legislature for a billion dollars, for using AI to illegally scape biometric data to name-tags photos without permission? I think we can do without that guys opinion on AI regulation.
As an interviewee, that's actually a very useful method for weeding out potential employers whose management exhibit the kind of stupidity that crashes companies. If your colleagues are being hired because they can polish shoes nicely rather than their ability to do their job*, that's not a company you want to work for.
* Unless your job is polishing shoes, obvs.