Bit of a hyperbolistic title. The core of the bug report doesn't require disassembly of the library. The bug author just went the extra step to do a root cause investigation, which of course requires light reversing work.
> As an analogy, imagine the replicator as a slime mold or a swarm of fruit flies, which replicate over days.
"If you could simply imagine the thing we're fearmongering about as something you find disgusting, that would make it much easier for us to make an absurd and specious argument". Very transparent behavior. Adds nothing to the post, and not a sign of confidence in one's own arguments.
If I imagine the dangerous thing (that only them can rein in) replicating as yeast in sourdough or bunnies in a flower field, it does mitigate the impact.
Physical design (what this seems to be targeting) already uses non-deterministic algorithms because floorplanning, placement, and routing are all difficult problems to solve with a deterministic algorithm. Introducing probabalistic approaches helps to find the right fit within the constraints.
There are a whole host of controls in place to mitigate this risk. Plus such an acquisition wouldn't be easy to keep secret, so as soon as an untrusted actor acquired control over a root, the CAB would likely immediately distrust the cert.
CAB has nothing to do with trust/distrust here. Its the Root CA Store Operators (Mozilla, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Adobe) which have to distrust here.
In other words: the CAB members would distrust the CA because the CA would be in violation of their individual root store policies, specifically the "you must follow the rules set by the CAB" part.
>>Professors should teach about AI, include how to prompt efficiently and how to critically scrutinize the output
>100% agree, as with any important technology. But this is just a small curriculum change, just one more topic to cover in the lecture, and maybe a class.
Critically scrutinizing LLM output is just critical thinking skills, something universities should already teach.
Healthcare worker shortages are a problem in the US and other developed countries with universal systems. The type of system doesn't really influence the waiting time.
Translator jobs aren't really getting wiped out according to the stats (in the US). Growth is still projected at 2% in the next 10 years.
They also have this to say about AI:
>Computer tools, including artificial intelligence (AI), are making the work of translators and localization specialists more efficient. However, many of these jobs cannot be entirely automated because computers cannot yet produce work comparable to what human translators do in most cases.
reply