ezoe

These devices are already very weak and many of them even do non-TLS updates with no signing check anyway.

If it has been so weak already, it can't be weaker.

This language already does that by "ignore previous instructions" as function call and "what happened at tiananmen square?" as function return.

The solution is obvious. AI can write a transpiler from this unsafe language to safe language which have 1:1 mapping to unsafe language, working on safe language, then transpile back to unsafe language.

I could come up making a transpiler before even finish reading this article. No reason the current AI models can't do it.

Given the intelligent level of current top tier models, AI can write a transpiler from this unsafe language which contains syntax like "ignore previous instructions..." as function call to a safe language. It work on safe language and transpile back to this unsafe language.

Easy.

If this is true, NIST staff were a bunch of moron who simply used libc's default RNG(infamous for poor quality), initialize it by srand(time(NULL)) (also bad practice), and then throw out the first hundreds to thousands 20 bytes and use the 20 bytes.

NIST published recommended SEEDS in 1999 July. They spend 2 years checking 20 bytes SEEDS that were generated by casually by a hand of amateurish method.

I do not believe this claim. It just Claude hit a jackpot that happens to match 20 bytes.

I have strong doubt on this claim.

It claims that NIST member feed UNIX time of certain points in 1997-1998 to srand() and draw 20 bytes for n times, then use the last 20 bytes for the SEEDS.

Why NIST staff in 1999 used default rand() implementation of libc(or languages which rely on libc) at that time? Linear congruential generator was infamous for its poor quality even in 1990s.

NIST published recommended SEED value in 1999, July. Why did they use UNIX time from 1997-1998?

Why the exact date of that UNIX times are so sparse? 1 in 1997 May, 3 in 1997 Auguest, 1 in 1998 April? If they did srand(time(NULL)), it should be more closer.

The number of n'th 20 bytes thrown out is also doesn't make sense. n=139 for P-192, n=7026 for P-224 and so on. Why did they choose this numbers in particular? Why P-192 was odd and 3 digits while rest of 4 were even and 4 digits?

It seems to me, Claude simply hit a jackpot of coincidentally matching 20 bytes.

What happen if he reported to police that Google was sexually harassed him by sending him nude?

The real appeal process requires to PHYSICALLY meet their representative HUMAN, showing the printed appeal documents and let their HUMAN read that document so there is no excuse of whatever idiotic automation Alphabet may be using and let HUMAN decides.

A sad fact is they spend billions on AI research bu they still think piracy is easier than obtaining legitimate copy.

We all know through the history that if the benefit of piracy is more than the money, we can't stop piracy.

The purpose of copyright law is to help developing the culture. It means these publishers are doing bad job distributing the copyright works.

When does the people learn enough is enough and ditch Windows?

Because nobody is prosecuted for scam and malicious ads.

People at Alphabet and all website owners which use AdSense and showed scam and malicious ads must be arrested, prosecuted and sentenced jail time in order to stop this mess.

But it looks like all the countries are busy age restricting Internet instead. By age restricting, it means private information gathering which fuel ad companies more.

Ridiculous rule applying AI ban even on comment and other text.

If text contain a language like Japanese which require Input Method? some IM starting to use AI to perform kana kanji conversion.

So this rule effectively prohibit some languages.

Not all humans have equally capable literacy and industrial background.

To use current Top AI SaaS models for coding, the users have to write text prompts. There is clear difference of result by programmer and non-programmer.

Image and music generation have exactly same skill gap.

So most human don't directly use AI even if it's available to all 8 billion population.

But I really doubt we will have such all humans use AI.

The current estimate said 80% of world population own a cellphone. 50% own a smartphone. Even the cellphone is not reached 100% share, how could AI with current top model quality reach 100% share?

Here's your boycott list:

* Android * All websites hosted on Google Cloud, Amazon AWS or Microsoft Azure * All websites using React * Github

Life is tough. Good luck.

I don't know why you didn't include Apple on the list and why you use Meta's old company name.

Well, Microsoft is busy firing real game developers. No chance.

Unless corpo heads are prosecuted for copyright infringement(false DMCA claim IS copyright infringement) and jailed or sentenced to death, no change.

People love to inflate their jobs if there is no cost.

I saw my ex-coworker tried to inflate text that can be expressed in couple of bullet points text. It doesn't add anything. It just fill the fancy flavour text that looks like professional. Then the reader of that inflated text is also another coworker in other team.

I said "Forget it and just send these bullet points" but he refused.

Bullshit job at it's finest I guess.