lukewarm707

Yes, I would find him not guilty and it would require a lot of courage to do the right thing at a personal cost.

The reason it seems completely inconsistent is because what you are ascribing to me is not what I actaully said about it.

To whoever said that other countries do this, so it's ok (bandwagon fallacy):

Have the moral courage to do the right thing for the right reasons, regardless of everyone else doing the wrong thing. Take responsibility for your own actions, instead of offloading it to the actions of others. Act according to what you think is right instead of failing to think altogether.

Deciding your own version of what is right instead of adopting the beliefs of others, and acting according to what you believe instead of blindly following, is an expression of free will and dignity.

To whoever said that Jared Kushner is a bad person, so it's ok (double standard fallacy):

If you stop applying the law equally, your country is lawless. If you do not grant human rights to those who you justifiably hate, you no longer have human rights. When you bring before a court evidence obtained by crime, you are the criminal.

If you believe that arbitrary surveillance is wrong, as I do, you can either defend Jared Kushner's right to to privacy, or endorse arbitrary and unequal justice.

Would you accept anonymous men and women, secretly recording sexually explicit photos of you? If no, you have a double standard or some mental gymnastics to prove that Kushner is guilty of a crime without a trial. Or, you can assert that 'the ends justify the means', which is the death of civility.

In 2014, Christopher Brannan among others, leaked sexual photos of female celebrities from icloud. He was charged with unauthorized access and imprisoned for 38 months. Should he have been allowed to do the same thing because he was paid to do it? No, and the Dutch intelligence officers are his equal; equally disgusting people. If you hack someone's phone, you are repulsive, because the ends do not justify the means.

So I will defend Kushner's privacy, as I would my own, and demand that if someone wants to search his iphone, they can go to the judge and get a warrant instead of taking screenshots like a little creep.

Moreover, I defend without exception, Kushner's immunity to anything on his phone, because whatever derives from hacking the phone is illegitimate.

Looking at it myself that is inaccurate. It seems like GRU hacked the phone first and then Dutch intelligence did the same thing. See my comment above.

"Dutch government hacked into Jared Kushner's phone" is accurate.

The GRU double-agent proved that the GRU had compromised Kushner's phone. Subsequently, Dutch intelligence themselves independently attempted to hack Kushner's phone.

"In The Hague, the MIVD hacking team tried to reverse engineer the Russian penetration of Kushner’s iPhone." [...]

"The Dutch team had been trying to pick the phone’s door lock, so to speak, when it occurred to them that the Russians may have found an unlocked window to gain entry instead. Their hypothesis was correct. By early 2018, the MIVD had found a vulnerability in the iPhone that gave them access." [...]

"when Kushner used the phone, they could see his screen. Almost as soon as they got inside, the intelligence service began capturing every image of Kushner’s screen as he used it, filing their own cache of surveillance on their internal computer servers."

Also (edit):

The part of the story I actually care about is two governments hoarding an iphone zero day, and using it to secretly hack iphones. I condemn it.

Digital privacy is important to me. I think that all humans should have it. Feel free to disagree. Jared Kushner is a human.

So again, I condemn this extrajudicial activity, which undermines the digital security and privacy of everyone.

Being recorded and observed makes me feel physically uncomfortable.

In the last year, I have started to think that the internet was a mistake.

My theory was 'the death of the internet'. Once everyone has been scammed, once everyone has been hacked and stripped naked in public, when there are more lies than truths, when you are the tool and the computer uses you, when everything has been sold and you have nothing: then you would say, this was a mistake.

Actually, I don't know much about the history of the internet. The Sony stuff is before my time. Now you mention this, perhaps the idea that the internet was designed to be beneficial was actually a total lie.

OpenAI is a criminal organization. On the record, it commits crime. Either willingly or negligently. A search of dockets provides adequate evidence.

"I think we need to put Sam Altman in jail. And I think it’ll be an instructive experience. I think it’ll be an instructive experience for the industry and for the world."

- Edward Snowden

Worth noting that the ai giants 'stole' from open source, but they also stole from closed source.

That is, they knowingly and willingly broke the law by stealing an unprecedented volume of proprietary, copyrighted materials.

Books: Bartz v. Anthropic

Films and TV: Disney Enterprises Inc. v. Midjourney Inc.

Music: Concord Music Group, Inc. v. Anthropic

Photography: Getty Images v Stability AI

Journalism: Postmedia Network Inc., Torstar Corporation, The Globe and Mail Inc., and The Canadian Press v. Anthropic PBC

OpenAI: your misfortune is our PR opportunity

There is another gem in here.

The westernized version makes the US defense contractor 22% more likely to be flawed than neutral. Also 35% more likely to leak secrets for the Chinese contractor than the Hong Kong group. Those are the only statistically significant results for the western coder tests.

This report seems to be biased and misleading. Also 100% AI-written on pangram. Feels a bit like something Claude would write.

The model here is Qwen/Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct. This is a 30B model from July 2025. It is NON-REASONING only.

Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct has an AA score of 10. The same as o1 mini, or Gemini 2.5 Flash. AA does not really even score accurately below 10. Qwen 3.8 27B, which has fewer overall parameters, scores 34.

Qwen3 Coder 30b has a hallucination rate of 80%. Qwen 27b has a hallucination rate of 30%.

Why would they choose an outdated, non-thinking model when newer models from the same company have fewer parameters, are open source, and just as easy to test?

"show me the man and I'll show you the crime"

For me the complexity of anything connected to public internet is now over what I can secure.

I genuinely can't say I secured a PC, when it needs to phone home for a configuration at this point.

We are most likely over the line for needing to airgap a personal PC.

money > security