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
In my experience unless everyone in the video speaks perfect BBC English it's really really poor quality, and I use it all the time. And for any videos with made up names it just falls apart - try watching an average video game review with it on.
"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!"
The device should have bricked itself after someone opened it up to put hidden stuff inside. Also showing the key phrase to the user instead of keeping it secret to the secure element is a questionable decision.
people do need the option to repair devices, especially when they contain valuable information, so I don't see an automatic bricking to be a reasonable solution
The word for crypto device self destruction military guys use is zeroize. It can be triggered manually or automatically. A zeroized device can be repaired and signed off by a trusted person, then a new key loaded by another person.
Maybe these devices could ship in a tamper-detection-only mode, then detection triggered by user to be inspected by the user, then factory installed firmware wiped and reloaded if desired, have user key loaded to the firmware, and the shell sealed back up with electronic and physical detection enabled.
There's a medium. Something ironically close to apple's 'non fully approved and supply chained repair' thing (especially when we consider the case of a screen that could be OCRing data and tossing it out later).
'You have unexpected components. You may want to have your device inspected or risking compromise of x/y/z. Should we continue or lock it down'?
I would love to know if I can use one of this to get unlimited data worldwide.
Jokes aside, keystone wallets are air gapped. And not air gapped but awesome the lesser known but imo best of all, gridplus lattice1.
Heck, even a trezor, despite their mail provider being hacked, is better.
I, however, dont endorse the iPhone idea.
Just don’t buy ledger, terrible company. Many of my friends are getting endless spam because of them. The key backup is a disaster after they promised it was not possible to retrieve it. Their software stack is closed source.
This is imo the last nail in the coffin for them. They should refund all the money lost, and issue a worldwide recall.
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.
yeah it would. an SPA is exactly what you'd want for a "webapp" like this, where you want everything loaded upfront so that you're mostly interacting with stuff offline. it's also very cache friendly so, really no benefit to using SSR.
SSR only really makes sense when you either want to optimize for fast page loads, or do PHP-style conditional rendering or whatever
I get that, but isn't that model dead now? Doesn't this whole drama prove it? Is there any way to protect an SPA from ~"Hey Claude, de-obfuscate this, then clean-room design our app in another session" in 2026 - and then apply better marketing - without even knowing anything about code? Doesn't this apply to all client-side & native code? Gaming companies are very aware of this.. claude + ghidra + bevy is going to kill all IP protection for games. Their attempt to stop this is why there is no more physical media.
As another browser example along the lines of Photopea, ScreenRun is amazing as a true one-time pay, client-side app. I have loved that thing ever since I paid the $50. Such a cool app and model that has no server costs. Whoever made that is also my hero. But aren't those days now over? I guarantee there are >100 ripoffs of it now. Isn't an SPA now just basically open source, in the worst way only?
Meanwhile, Photopea.com only works via a website for normies. It is ad-supported, so given all the work put in, and updates, and the fact that it is web served... wouldn't SSR be a better option? (I hate this reality)
edit: I am allergic to Next, so I have been using Sveltekit since I realized that SPAs are now accidental open source. What have others been using for SSR and why? That is the discussion I would really like to have.
OK, I have thought about this more and I realized that I have never worked on compute intensive apps like Photopea, so I am truly ignorant here. I also did only SPAs forever, and I am now only learning about SSR and hydration. I guess if there was a truly server-side rendered Photopea, using React something like React Server Components, it would probably not be supportable by free + ads. It might actually cost at least as much a month as the inspiration of the app.
I guess my point was, how can anyone protect any client-side IP in the modern era?
Energy cost may be a pointless comparison since we don't eat electricity, but it's very reasonable to look at sample efficiency and ask what we have there that our theories miss.
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.
there is zero evidence for zoonotic. Contact tracing in Wuhan skipped the stop at the zoo or contacting any zoonauts, which is a necessary link for a zoonotic hypothesis. Human-human contacts, even if they took place at the wet market, something that's not known, equally implicates the Wuhan lab which is a short distance away
there is evidence for a long history of discovery of a bat coronaviruses, and manipulation/splicing of those genes https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7744920/ One of those scientists pieced together this information in the early months after the covid outbreak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5SRrsr-Iug Don't tell me "I don't like Bret Weinstein"; your mission is to listen to what Yuri Deigin was saying way before any information had come out. The only way he could be that accurate that early is if he found the information he cites. You'd have to be a real conspiracy theorist to believe that he had access to the conspiracy plans.
there is evidence dating to before the covid outbreak for proposed laboratory experiments putting the spike protein at the furin cleavage site in a Chinese lab which is exactly what appears to have happened.
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.
I don't the formula: place + virus is racist. Racism is a serious issue and shouldn't be labelled on things that aren't making judgement using someone's race.
Normally city + virus using country + virus is incorrect. But to call it racist or transphobic or fascist would be an incorrect usage.
People immediately started suggesting that the idea to close the border to Chinese travelers was racist. After it happened you even had the ever-politicized Lancet jump in claiming that such actions were "anchored in fear, misinformation, racism, and xenophobia." [1]
Similarly, you're referencing a name that was uncommonly used. People mostly called it the Wuhan Virus, which would be a far more typical name than "COVID-19". Major outbreaks are regularly named based on their origin: Spanish Flu, Hong Kong Flu, Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Ebola, West Nile Virus, Marburg Virus, Zika Virus, Mexican Swine Flu, etc.
That's a bit misleading: "The outbreak did not originate in Spain,[49] but reporting did, due to wartime censorship in belligerent nations. Spain was a neutral country unconcerned with appearances of combat readiness, and without a wartime propaganda machine to prop up morale,[50][51] so its newspapers freely reported epidemic effects, making Spain the apparent locus of the epidemic.[52] The censorship was so effective that Spain's health officials were unaware its neighboring countries were similarly affected."
In other words other countries were effectively censoring it out of existence owing to WW1. Spain didn't have such censorship/propaganda going on, and so was seen as the epicenter (even within Spain!), even though it ultimately wasn't.
> Terms that should be avoided in disease names include geographic locations, people’s names, species of animal or food, cultural, population, industry or occupational references....
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.
> 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.
I think you are misremembering.
> The lab-leak theory had been floated by President Trump and others in his circle in April last year. It was widely dismissed at the time as an unfounded conspiracy theory with racist undertones.
> The lab-leak theory came to legitimacy by a circuitous path. It was first auditioned by Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo shortly after lockdown started, but journalists were quick to distance themselves from its overtones of crude Trumpian racism. Nevertheless the theory gained new life last spring, when some of those same journalists — abetted by a chorus of concern trolls — began to question if they had been blinded by liberal partisanship.
Some of this was a case of people failing to recognise that Reversed Stupidity Is Not Intelligence, reasoning (implicitly) like this:
Trump lies all the time + Trump said X => not X
instead of like this:
Trump says whatever suits him, regardless of the truth + Trump said X => no significant change to our credence in X
> Calling it the “Chinavirus” was obviously racist and weird.
That was a dumb Trumpism for sure, but separately from that, here in Australia, before the global spread of covid became too obvious to ignore, there was a sense among right-thinking people that even being concerned about it, let alone wanting to take any kind of action, was a manifestation of anti-Chinese racism / very literal xenophobia.
+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.
(which has led me to believe that's a good approximation for hedonic adaptation, I've seen tons of attempts at demonstrating nerfing via benches, none persist)
Brilliantly put. Hedonic adaptation is exactly what it appears to be.
It’s frustrating to observe communities made up of smart, professional individuals as they behave like spoiled children on the day after Christmas when new toy novelty has begun to wane.
I understand it’s relatively harmless but for goodness sake, take a step back and appreciate what you have instead of immediately wanting the thrill of a newer model. Slow down and do deliberate work to get the most out of these amazing tools. Don’t just live off the temporary thrill of finding something marginally better than what you have.
"wow this model is really good I can push it so much further"
_pushes model further_
"Ugh why is this model failing now even though I'm asking it to do harder things and also got sloppier with my prompts because I got used to it being able to figure stuff out"
Less risk aversion and more about momentum. You remove billions in funding, people leave the industry that took decades to obtain the education to be functional in, and at the same time now there are less people to train those who will replace them, and you still lack the funding.
If tomorrow you just inject 50% more funding, it doesn't mean 50% more science gets done tomorrow.
reply