the 70/30 principle: AI handles 70% of execution, the human provides the 30% that matters.

Never mentioned authentication

readable AND writable by anyone on Earth for 11 days

Shouldn’t you have had a human check that before going live, given the 70/30 principle?

Full writeup with forensic details, the remediation comedy, and the 70/30 framework: mpdc.dev/the-locksmiths-apprentice I document everything — wins and losses — because someone building their first self-hosted stack shouldn’t have to learn this the hard way.

I don’t think they should learn from you, either, to be fair.

You sound like what a twelve year old imagines sociopaths are.

I didn’t. Your asterisk and clarification was ambiguous.

Noon is when the sun is highest in the sky.

Solar noon is, yes. But in most places, solar noon and 12 PM are at different times.

It’s night from sunset until dawn. And if someone said “in the morning” I would never interpret that as meaning before dawn.

It is controversial, because one definition of “morning” is dawn to noon and another is midnight to noon. And saying “night” is “sunset to midnight” is also new because you just came up with that.

The fisherman is being fished by someone above the panel and the bait is the iPhone.

My first thought was that ending the taxes at land ownership was shortsighted - all capital should be taxed - but then I looked up Georgism on Wikipedia and saw that that was basically already in scope (mostly by “including title of ownership for natural resources and other contrived privileges (e.g., intellectual property)”).

Other people have computers - friends, family, etc… Libraries, hotel and apartment lobbies, community centers, etc., frequently have them available for free use.

Doesn’t their API also require you to allow-list IPs, making it basically useless for dynamic DNS?

From https://www.namecheap.com/support/api/intro/ under “Whitelisting IP.”

How do you define “intelligence,” precisely?

Is my dog intelligent? What about a horse or dolphin? Macaws or chimpanzees?

Human brains do a number of different things behind the scenes, and some of those things look an awful lot like AI. Do you consider each of them to be intelligence, or is part of intelligence not enough to call it intelligence?

If you don’t consider it sufficient to say that part of intelligence is itself “intelligence,” then can you at least understand that some people do apply metonymy when saying the word “intelligence?”

If I convinced you to consider it or if you already did, then can you clarify:

The thing with machine learning is that it is inexplicable, much like parts of the human brain is inexplicable. Algorithms can be explained and understood, but machine learning, and its efficacy with problem spaces as they get larger and it’s fed more and more data, isn’t truly understood even by people who work deeply with it. These capabilities allow them to solve problems that are otherwise very difficult to solve algorithmically - similar to how we solve problems. Unless you think you have a deeper understanding than they do, how can you, as you claim, understand machine learning and its capabilities well enough to say that it is not at least similar to a part of intelligence?

If you’re using the screen on the front of your fridge and your fridge’s built-in buttons, if your computer is in the door or walls of the fridge as opposed to just chilling on a shelf like a leftover burrito, if your computer doesn’t have its own distinct power source, and if your fridge continues to cool your food like a fridge… why not?

No, it’s not running entirely on the fridge’s hardware at that point, but you did basically hack your fridge to be able to play Crysis.

In this case it does all of the above and also triggers device functionality based off of game events.

Personally I didn’t think the pregnancy test one really counted, either, but I’m with you on this one. This isn’t just “I put Doom on a sex toy,” but “I put Doom on a sex toy and used game events to trigger its functionality,” which is a level above.

Also looking at the pregnancy test one now I might change my mind. They did use a different microcontroller and screen, but the pregnancy test already had a microcontroller inside it; it just wasn’t programmable. If the replacement microcontroller and screen had the same specs as the old one, it’s more than fair to call that a win IMO. At that point, it’s the same hardware, after all.

In the game, this happens even when housing is available and affordable - the bug is that the homeless people are wealthy and there are vacant, affordable houses that they can move into, they just choose to be homeless. There isn’t even a markup from landlords, because an update already deleted them.

In real life, the problem is that we still have landlords. Idk why we don’t just delete them like the game devs did.

Why do you think that an entity or set of entities capable of simulating the entirety of our existence would have their creativity capped in a way that’s meaningful to us?

We can’t infer the rules directly from this information, but we can draw conclusions about what they wouldn’t be.

Can you give an example of a rule for a containing reality that you think we could rule out?

Yeah, this is just an issue with the Lemmy post’s title. The article is clear that 15% are using controllers now, up from 5% in 2018.

It’s largely the first one, at least according to The Man Who Killed Google Search.

See also the Hackernews discussion and this follow-up article by the same author (with links to an article with Google’s response, summaries of other discussions on the topic, etc.)

Do you disagree that the US isn’t supporting Israel, then, or do you disagree that what Israel is doing to Palestinians amounts to genocide?

Some reading for you in case you’re somehow not familiar with the topic:

• https://jewishcurrents.org/a-textbook-case-of-genocide
• https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_genocide_accusation
• https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/11/gaza-un-experts-call-international-community-prevent-genocide-against
• https://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/israel-palestine-conflict-history-causes-and-international-law
• https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
• https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/
• https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67922346

Even if the international courts don’t rule that Israel is committing genocide, that will necessarily have been influenced by the United States’s close ties to Israel, so that they haven’t yet said whether it is or isn’t genocide is irrelevant. According to the evidence we have, it is.

That said, see also the intro of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_genocide_in_the_United_States

Others, like historian Gary Anderson, contend that genocide does not accurately characterize any aspect of American history, suggesting instead that ethnic cleansing is a more appropriate term.

I’ve seen that same statement by people opposed to the use of the word “genocide” when talking about Israel’s genocide of Palestine, and it’s just as credible there as when “historian Gary Anderson” said it. At best, such a stance is pedantic; at worst, it supports Israel’s genocide by denying and enabling it.

“Glue is not pizza sauce” seems like a common fact to me but Googles llm disagrees for example.

That wasn’t something an LLM came up with, though. That was done by a system that uses an LLM. My guess is the system retrieves a small set of results and then just uses the LLM to phrase a response to the user’s query by referencing the links in question.

It’d be like saying to someone “rephrase the relevant parts of this document to answer the user’s question” but the only relevant part is a joke. There’s not much else you can do there.

UBI doesn’t give any power to those who own the means of automation, nor does it take power away from laborers. Automation does that. Automation reduces the leverage of the laborer by reducing the capitalist’s reliance on labor.

We have the same leverage regardless of whether we have UBI or not, but the leverage of employers is reduced with UBI. That said, if more people opt not to work thanks to UBI, then the people who choose to work will see their leverage increased.

Say I go to a furniture store and buy a table. It has a 5 year warranty. 2 years later, it breaks, so I call Ubersoft and ask them to honor the warranty and fix it. If they don’t, then I can file a suit against them, i.e., for breach of contract. I may not even have to file a suit, as there may be government agencies who receive and act on these complaints, like my local consumer protection division.

I’m talking about real things here. Your example is a situation where the US government agrees that a company shouldn’t be permitted to take my money and then renege on their promises. And that’s generally true of most governments.

Supposing an absence of regulations protecting consumers like me, like you’re trying to suggest in your example, then it would be reasonable to assume an absence of laws and regulations protecting the corporation from consumers like me. Absent such laws, a consumer would be free to take matters into their own hands. They could go back to Ubersoft and take a replacement table without their agreement - it wouldn’t be “stealing” because it wouldn’t be illegal. If Ubersoft were closed, the consumer could break in. If Ubersoft security tried to stop them, the consumer could retaliate - damaging Ubersoft’s property, physically attacking the owner / management / employees, etc… Ubersoft could retaliate as well, of course - nothing’s stopping them. And as a corporation, they certainly have more power than a random consumer - but at that point they would need to employ their own security forces rather than relying on the government for them.

Even if we kept laws prohibiting physical violence, the consumer is still regulated by things like copyright and IP protections, e.g., the anti-circumvention portion of the DMCA. Absent such regulations, a consumer whose software was rendered unusable or changed in a way they didn’t like could reverse engineer it, bypass DRM, host their own servers, etc… Given that you didn’t speak against those regulations, I can only infer that you are not opposed to them.

Why do you think we don’t need regulations protecting consumers but that we do need regulations restricting them?