Are you arguing that it’s not possible to articulate all the rules? It seems as though you’ve done a good job highlighting a good number of constraints and edge cases.
Further iteration and feedback when implicit/undocumented rules are violated will get you closer. It’s not like there’s an infinite source of rules, and many of these are just general knowledge that does exist online. You can eventually get there.
If we look at traditional project roles, it's the responsibility of the Programmer to articulate the Business Logic in a way that can be interpreted by a computer (i.e. write the rules in code, using their chosen programming language).
It's the responsibility of a Business Analyst to study a work process, and articulate the rules which govern the process.
With vibe-coding, the agent is usually playing the role of a Programmer. Are they also playing the role of a Business Analyst?
If we look at iterative development, that's usually the responsibility of a Product Owner.
With agentic development, we expect AI to perform the role of developer. In this example, is the bar manager able to perform the role of BA or PO? Is the agent able to accommodate and fill in the blanks that a BA or PO would normally fill?
There may also be human edge-cases, such as "Don't schedule Dave and Brian together, they don't get on".
Agentic AI doesn't have the nuance for all these factors. Many situations (such as a bar manager or restaurant manager with a small venue) may be better off with simply having a human plan the schedule on paper.
Well just wait a day or so and the data will be free. It’s not like these polygons are constantly changing (or that the impact of slightly stale data is of any consequence). The speed is at best mail-scale, and someone will surely leak it to an open data source.
I do wonder how much of their inference is running on 10-year old TPUs. I’d imagine not much, if only because 10 years ago the justification for massive compute was quite different than today.
I'm not going to disagree with you--I've said multiple times in the past (not sure if I've said it here) that I don't think it's possible to be both ethical and a billionaire.
But that's not really a defense of the behavior, and it's perhaps a sign that we should stop valorizing billionaires.
It was giving me really strong nostalgia but I wasn’t able to place what exactly for. I haven’t played this before but it definitely evoked something. I don’t think Zelda… maybe memories of playing Golden Sun.
On one hand, this is valid. On the other hand, security researchers can be some uber-paranoid weirdos who prefer to be entirely anonymous, and this could have a chilling effect.
Net net it’s probably positive it’s just too easy to spam these otherwise.
In all past bug bounty programs I started I made it clear we would only prioritize findings as serious if PGP encrypted to the security team PGP key to review offline.
The serious researchers all knew how to do this and complied and usually got paid, and the unencrypted stuff was basically always noise we never paid out on.
Probably not as much of a filter now that AI is in play though.
That kind of stuff won't work anywhere near as well as a bullshit filter anymore: Most of the bullshit is AI generated and AI has no problem following rules like that-- even better than humans.
Instead, you'll need something like "you must enroll your pgp fingerprint in our system by sending a handwritten postcard featuring a tourist attraction in your region".
> Instead, you'll need something like "you must enroll your pgp fingerprint in our system by sending a handwritten postcard featuring a tourist attraction in your region".
When you see how shitty many companies are in going after legitimate folks reporting real security vulnerabilities. it frankly shocks me that anyone would ever use their real name.
The kind of security researchers who prefer to be entirely anonymous are not seeking monetary rewards from bug bounties. No company would pay such researchers anonymously (like using Monero). If they accept bitcoin well they aren’t really that into being anonymous.
They use Persona, which is heavily invested-in by Peter Thiel's Founder's Fund. Peter Thiel, of Palantir (funded initially by In-Q-Tel, the CIA's VC arm).
No shit security researchers don't want to give ID scans and biometric data to them.
It seems a bit like tragedy of the commons. If we all move towards consuming content this way, who is posting what and where? How is it discovered?
One of the great losses of the age of social media is physical community, as people substitute digital presence for in-person interactions. This is the next step with the loss of digital community.
Why would those content stop getting made? A lot of hardcore tech YouTubers are university lecturers. Chinese fried rice stalls on TikTok makes living in selling the rice. Japanese anime keeps getting made and aired.
I think there might be a lesson learned from the era of attention economy and also a potential explanation as to what advertiser friendliness was about - the attention economy did not graduate from being a surplus market. Advertisers had no incentives to subsidize the waste byproducts of fried rice stall, but the system was too deeply molded for them. The amount of standalone contents that are native to social media are tiny.
Anyway, I just don't think the contents that are made because of a social feed are the ones that weren't worth much even on social media.
You assume that if digital communication is lost, people wouldn’t communicate at all? I highly doubt that seeing as our natural instinct is to search for human connection.
I see the concern, because I agree that social media has to some degree already done this, and that we've lost something in that process.
But - there's no reason this couldn't actually be a good thing. I can totally imagine a platform[0] where the focus is less on creation and more on curation. I sub to some person or community who's going to share good links, and I see only that, instead of the slop firehose from The Algorithm.
(and yes, social media was already more like this, in the early days).
[0] and platform implies more than I mean, could just be some nice wrapper around RSS or activitypub or whatever
Further iteration and feedback when implicit/undocumented rules are violated will get you closer. It’s not like there’s an infinite source of rules, and many of these are just general knowledge that does exist online. You can eventually get there.
reply