Aachen

> the company can agree to everything and then dissapear.

Isn't that the case for every law related to commitments? Warranty, repair parts and battery longevity is a thing now iirc... haven't had issues with that being avoided so far, at least not in this way

> our locations are visible to each other via GPS

... via mobile data or WiFi, you mean. Whether it uses GPS, Galileo, track measurement points, or even "driver calls the control centre to update their position" doesn't have much to do with it. What I assume you mean is redundancy so that two or more systems can communicate train positions independently, where the more relevant problem is how to get the data across in a timely manner. The driver of the stationary train called in their position and it wasn't used: it's a communication problem, not a "where am I" problem. Idk why the focus on GPS and using GPS for communication (which GPS can't do, and newer systems only do at very low speeds for emergency communication) but finding one's position is usually not the problem

I didn't vote on your comment but consider that people might just find the comment nonconstructive or uninteresting (which is what the guidelines say to base votes on) rather than that there is a "rule against criticising Gizmodo"

If nobody sees it, same thing in the end? Not that it can be relied on, you can nitpick the technicalities here about under whose control it is at that point, but that's not the point

what's the value of that when you can call it with any context? As a proof of concept, you could have it do the attack on a dummy target of your own, take the tokens up until the point where it decides you're authorised, swap out the dummy name with your desired target, and continue the session from there

Reminds me of 'NOBUS', where security agencies would believe that so long as you just don't tell anyone about a vulnerability that you discovered or introduced, nobody else would abuse that vulnerability to exploit a target while you can get access at any time. Training an LLM in such a way that it only generates the desired tokens if its memory demonstrates authorisation (surely nobody else could inject the right context otherwise) feels like a strange anthropomorphisation

Maybe a starting point that nobody would disagree on? You could ask the author, at least I feel like at Fosdem everyone's approachable

The post said they eventually won that case, though

Especially for someone not "well exposed" to generated text, they might think the words carry meaning the way they do when someone thought about the question and came to an answer. If anyone can interpret this, it's the people who know what they're dealing with (be it from exposure or, better, from a conceptual understanding)

Thanks! Yeah that sorta mirrors what I wrote (Opus allowing me to halve my audiobook library size, making it worth it to switch fully), just that I'd say new generations of people will also grow up with whatever the 'nerds' (including those at large businesses) make the new default or at least ready to use and recommended to anyone who looks it up

Bless the Internet Archive for basically hosting a second copy of the internet with sufficient bandwidth to serve whatever is currently down, while this single site didn't survive the traffic it got individually

Would have thought advertising and transaction fees myself, but the article says it's usually oil (ok I should have thought of that), "pharmaceuticals" (mkay, seems cheaper to make elsewhere so that's a bit strange), or aircraft and their parts (wut? How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?!)