refulgentis

It's playful!

But it's also not even wrong, in the Pauli sense.

That makes me wonder if "I see your CS proof, how does this affect LLMs / nvidia stonk price???" being immediately self-described as "playful" ensures criticism looks cranky.

There isn't one, that's sort of the thing. The invisible hand of downvotes is the only thing indicating that in the thread, and thus only indirectly. We only have two choices, a magical tampering detector that bricks the whole thing (maybe desirable for some applications, if it never false positive'd), or, the vulnerability.

I'm not even sure a tampering detector would help. If this can happen, I'm fairly sure someone would figure out how to do the ocr by appending components externally.

No, it's not. (source: used to work on Android at Google, and its as simple as it seems, more and more MBA-style management meant more and more didn't care, which meant it was more and more poorly resourced, until it was discovered by revealed preferences that no one cared, at least, no one cared enough to speak up)

Not sure what you mean, they added automated transcriptions a few years back and it’s mind blowing. I regularly use it for 6-8 hour long court footage and it’s superior than any other local solution I use, albeit not perfect

I don't know coin stuff, but if top comment's...

"We're talking here about a tiny eSIM implant and a little CPU doing OCR on the fonts appearing on the hardware wallet's screen to read the secrets during set up. So the secure element ain't tampered with."

...is accurate...it's one of the rare times I'd agree there's nothing they can do. And I was all prepared to storm in here saying "convenient excuse!"

Dumb q from someone who has done mostly native dev for…19 years, whoa.

Wouldn’t that screw up his whole thing? Because now you need infra to render to free users?

I think it's fun back-of-the-napkin sometimes to compare meat to matmuls but ultimately fallacious to its core, making it an intellectual tarpit.

It's much harder to argue with the math and empirical results.

They were right, closing borders with China doesn't stop the virus from spreading, there's no scientific basis for that claim.

It's amazing how you had all those at the tip of your tongue, you are a clearly a learned medical scholar.

A peer comment discusses where the Spanish Flu originated, and illustrates the gap between what you asked the LLM for and well, how humans think and what the people you're talking to are actually talking about.

The LLM also went a bit overboard with the Wuhan Virus thing, it's a response, but it's hilariously out of context because, again, there's a gap between you're asking it for and what your interlocutor is communicating.

It's so confused that it's giving "Ah, but, people didn't say the thing you said was bad, because it was bad. The politically correct version was Wuhan Virus." - thus validating exactly what I said, the Chinavirus version was weird and bad.

This says there’s 0 evidence to claim it’s a lab leak, and plenty of evidence, literal contact tracing from the wet market. They took the lab leak seriously and were emotionally resonant with you and I, however, they must deal in facts when they write.

Calling it the “Chinavirus” was obviously racist and weird. It was an ex posto facto thing to claim saying it was a lab leak was racist. I’m sure someone said that, however, no one serious was nor was it a common position.

+1. 38 year old now, probably read it when I was 10. And it still has a special place in my heart, I was just thinking about picking up a copy last week. RIP.