peppermint_gum

What makes you think that it's "so damn hackable"?

Also, this particular attack requires administrator privileges and bypasses a security boundary that doesn't even exist on e.g. Linux. Linux doesn't have driver signatures and root can easily install a new kernel module.

>It's simple. Human writing is short and to the point (either because they're lazy or want to save the reader's time), yet still manages to capture your attention. AI writing tends to be too elaborate and lacks a sense of "self".

Corporate (and SEO) writing has always been overly verbose and tried to sound fancy. In fact, this probably is where LLMs learned that style. There's no reliable heuristic to tell human- and AI-writing apart.

There's a lot of worry about people being fooled by AI fakes, but I'm also worried about false positives, people seeing "AI" everywhere. In fact, this is already happening in the art communities, with accusations flying left and right.

People are too confident in their heuristics. "You are using whole sentences? Bot!" I fear this will make people simplify their writing style to avoid the accussations, which won't really accomplish anything, because AIs already can be prompted to avoid the default word-salad style.

I miss the time before LLMs...

Then I'm not sure what you mean by "deterrence". Both of the linked articles argue against increasing the severity of punishment, but they also say that the certainty of getting caught is a strong deterrent.

This doesn't seem to be in conflict with what the GP said ("supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively"). It seems to me that many people have a problem with thieves not being punished at all.

> AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime,

Could you share some of this evidence?

This is a spam video composed of stock footage. It doesn't add any new information, it shows some random wasp species, unrelated to the ones just discovered, and some random scientists (possibly actors).

Yeah, OP is overly dramatic, Reddit has technical issues all the time.

So we shouldn't make it easier for people to meet each other, because some of those people might be white supremacists?

I'm sorry, but I think you may be spending too much time online.

One thing I don't understand about Swift is why it uses a private fork of LLVM. Why can't they upstream whatever changes they need?

>There will be four ways in which ISA systems will work to slow the vehicle down, and it will be up to the manufacturers to pick which one they want to use. The EU regulations permit a system that can use a cascaded acoustic warning, a cascaded vibrating warning, an accelerator pedal with haptic feedback, or a speed control function in which the speed of the vehicle will be gradually reduced.

This is more like a "speed warner" than a "speed limiter".

This could have been AMD, but they choose to sabotage themselves with half-baked APIs that don't even support all of their GPUs. Hell, ROCm didn't even support Windows until recently.

Frankly, it's shocking how bad they are at it.

This person's entire argument is that the (A)GPL is "viral", and therefore companies have no right to relicense the software they own the copyright for, and they should be sued.

He doesn't quote any specific part of the (A)GPL that supports his argument (frankly, I doubt he's ever read it), he just keeps throwing out the buzzword "viral" as if it means anything. He clearly doesn't understand the concept of CLAs and copyright law in general.

This is a very bad post, and I'm surprised it made the front page.