I think my plan of never letting an LLM access the open Internet wins yet again. Maybe GET requests only, no headers or parameters, ask me for every new domain, and only URLs comprising words/numbers no alphanumerics. Maybe. But it seems trivial to allow for a prompt injected attack vector either way

Claude will/did set the UA to your email on a GET

Yeah but that was because it was gently asked to please not. I mean running a firewall/proxy that actually does it.

What's great about this is the are 2 ways to read this:

1. Ukraine is in an offensive position

2. Ukraine is in a defensive position and thus it was indeed Musk

To me these are both very dumb stances. Lose lose statement

I read it as being more specific than one overarching "position". Long-range strike drones are arguably "offensive action" even in a clearly defensive war, interceptor drones are clearly "defensive action". Midrange strike against targets in occupied Ukrainian territory are a bit of a grey area.

Of course, Starlink/Starshield is already unavailable for long-range strike due to geofencing, and the speed limit was clobbering interceptors right when they needed that speed to cope with the new jet-powered Gerans, so it's still a daft stance overall.

>Midrange strike against targets in occupied Ukrainian territory are a bit of a grey area.

Nothing grey about destroying invading army on your own territory.

>speed limit was clobbering interceptors

That version never passed the smell test, interceptors dont use Starlink.

Ukraine's position has been that starlink is used exclusively for drone defense, i.e., interceptors. That is sensible because that's within the contracted terms. However, there is intentional obfuscation of starlink and starshield in all of this. Ukraine also claims that it doesn't use star-anything for offensive drone attacks, which is kind of unbelievable. The contention started when the White House told Ukraine that refineries were off limits, and then Ukraine struck refineries anyway. It seems clear to me that 1) they are using the technology, however it is branded, to reach and possibly cross the border, and 2) this was a signal to abide by the temporary restrictions, as the tri-lateral talks are being negotiated.

Refineries are hundreds to thousands kilometers from the border, Starlink doesnt work there.

Starshield does

Starshield never worked in russia.

The white house agreed to terms with Russia without involving Ukraine. Russia bombed ukraines energy infrastructure literally within hours of Trump saying that the ceasefire was effective and Ukraine waited three days before bombing energy infrastructure in Russia again.

Trump and Musk are being petty because they can't control a foreign nation with a fake agreement that's in the middle of a war. Tried to twist Ukraine's arm. Disgusting shameful behavior. I hope they rot in jail.

I don't see where it says this is the final major update?

We've suspected there was some type of elo ranking for years. But this video is nothing. No sources, no source code, no reproducibility. Pun intended.

Why would you tell it is any persona? Is this the magical "prompt engineering"?

I haven't looked into this one but I've seen analysis about past reports that this has more to do with context pollution than any nefarious backdoor. If you pump an LLM prompt with irrelevant information it will just do worse. Some bits of irrelevant information will have a bigger impact than others, but in general it is a good practice to keep prompts detailed but relevant.

To surface trojan intentions in open models released with possibly hidden intention in mind.

Why would you create an AI Trojan that relied on you telling it that you were a Sagittarius? Why are you talking about astrology or nationality when you're programming? I guess

> To surface trojan intentions in open models released with possibly hidden intention in mind.

It might be the case that the models internally predict the nationality of the user given other indicators, e.g. tells in the way they write.

You are a wizard you can cast level 9 Python skills.

While true, they renamed themselves.

What an interesting layout for a mobile site. It had the archive and a bunch of other stuff before the post. I thought OP linked something wrong.

You can get them up to 16Mb/2MB. Which is 1/128 what NOR flash comes in for a similar price and package. Certainly a trade.

I think MRAM is the future though.

Phase-change memory is the most advanced high-endurance nvram, with Intel and Micron's XPoint being the most advanced to have hit production. If it had stuck around long enough for the RAMpocalypse, they'd probably sell out their production capacity.

It is the future, and has been the future for almost 40 years already! I bet that's what the hoverboards will use inside their microcontrollers — gotta drive those portable fusion reactors reliably!

I though bubble memory was the future. Dammit, I missed another memo.

Only if Flash stagnates as a technology. I suspect it will in the next 5 years due to reliability but you never know.

From what I've gathered, and I'm still feeling like I'm missing something, most people don't seem to be doing that. They seem to pass the binary in, say to decompile it, and out the other side is something that looks similar but not exact. https://youtu.be/qFEuYUfauNY .

On the recent WAN show LTT said they tried the recent Photoshop clones and they were buggy, feature missing messes. If they were truly reverse engineer decompiles (minus needing a subscription) they would work just as well. But they don't so they're not.

the adobe suite clones are vibe coded clean room implementations, decompiles on the other hand should compile 1:1 to the existing software, and we have ways to verify that's the case. recompiles from my understanding of the term are somewhere inbetween.

I can't speak for others, but I do know that my screen time is filled with this news feed and engineering or other STEM videos. I could never study, it just didn't work for me. But I have a good memory so watching videos tangential to my field helped. I ended up with straight As in my last years of uni, supported by 40+ hours/week of YouTube. Still not sure if that's accounting for 2x speed.

There's a lot of nuance to this. They should consider what we're "staring" at. Is it AI slop content like our parents seem to enjoy? Or more than that? Likewise for social media: maybe consider why in a society where it's prohibitively expensive to do anything and there's a loss of third spaces people are turning to online connections. And beyond that, connections to people from different backgrounds and locations. I can talk to somebody from the other side of the planet online without effort. We can learn of eachothers' hardships and experiences instantly. I think this got shown very well when rednote happened and American + Chinese teens/young adults mixed together en masse for the first time.

I worry that as a smart person you are too optimistic about what your fellow youths are staring at. TikTok and its copycat short vertical video sites are primarily full of content designed to make you dumber, whether it’s prurient content, simplistic and stupid political/cultural takes, or fads. And it of course comes with a joke of a promise that if you waste your own time making the same garbage, then you too can have a career as an “influencer”! I don’t think any of this is giving the benefits your YouTube viewing has.

"The Stare" is IMHO not the stare at a phone, but the response to a question.

Other people have mentioned this to me — that Gen Z and younger millennials are likely to fix you in a stare when answering a question.

Bit of a rant incoming:

This is a Gen X teaching failure. As kids we were taught to face front and look at the teacher when they were teaching, and in the era of fears of poorer attention, "attention-focussed" teachers have mistakenly extended this idea that looking the teacher in the eyes when answering is better, when it is worse.

The teacher thinks they have the pupil's attention: they do! But the pupil is supposed to be answering the question: that is where their attention should be.

Kids who do now have trouble directing their attention are not going to do better at answering the question this way, because they are wasting it. As long as the kid is making an attempt to answer the question, teachers should let them stare at the ceiling or a blank wall.

> half of it is spent staring at a screen

That's what I was referring to. Not the Gen Z stare.

Right, sry