

What
This is just so, so dumb.
What
This is just so, so dumb.
Broadly speaking, I’d classify “being dumb” as being incurious, uncritical, and unskeptical as a general rule. Put another way: intellectual laziness - more specifically, insisting on intellectual laziness, and particularly, being proud of it.
A person with a lower than normal IQ can be curious, and a person with a higher than normal IQ can be incurious. It’s not so much about raw intelligence as it is about the mindset one holds around knowledge itself, and the eagerness (or lack thereof) with which a person seeks to find the fundamental truth on topics that they’re presented with.
And you know what? The people who believe that are right.
Note that that’s not a commentary on the capabilities of LLMs.
They’re not going to pay you if they classify it as “not a problem”. And you get what you pay for.
Honestly, I would encourage any researcher who gets a brush-off response like this as a response to a real and meaningful security report to lean even harder into malicious compliance. Simply post it to TikTok or Instagram or whatever - and I am intentionally picking the pervasive platforms that I despise and find problematic, simply because they have the largest user bases. If it’s “not a problem”, they shouldn’t mind if how-to videos explaining how to elicit the “not problematic” behavior start going viral.
Sometimes they do rather inappropriate copium pieces when shits looking particularly bleak. That doesn’t excuse it, but it does explain it.
It’s only a clarification, not the definition of the significant terms
This document updates RFC 2119 by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.
ticket closed as “by design”
The ruling says that Wynn-Williams should stop promoting the book and, to the extent she could, stop further publication. It did not order any action by the publisher.
Emphasis mine. RFC 2119 strikes again :D
SHOULD: This word, or the adjective “RECOMMENDED”, mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
I’d ask how the Meta lawyer could sleep at night arguing such a bullshit and openly caustic line of rhetoric, but the answer’s probably “like a baby, in an extremely expensive and comfortable bed”
You just gotta be big enough that you can buy enough people. FAANG is there (though this is Wild West politics nowadays so who the fuck knows what’s gonna happen). But when you own the people writing the laws to control you… they’re not controlling you.
Honestly, if I had done something like this and they twigged to it, I’d consider just fucking off and joining the French foreign legion.
Thank fucking god.
lol I’m so exited for these to flame out hard
Not when it comes to the fash.
They do not get even the barest semblance of sympathy, mercy, or benefit of the doubt. Ever.
I find Wolfenstein 1 and 2 to be extremely therapeutic.
I’m confidently wrong a lot of the time too. But I mainly do that just to fuck with people.
Thankfully, no crime was committed
I just turn of my camera and turn on Forza Motorsport or something like that