• 0 Posts
  • 66 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle


  • Honestly, I have no idea what’s going on in conservative spaces, but they’ve been taking quotes out of context for well over a decade at this point (if not longer but I haven’t paid attention much longer than that). It’s entirely possible he said that and they’re quoting it, though the conclusion I’d have without more context is that he’s referring to something like binary partisanship, not gender. edit: skimmed past the quote with context lol. Ok, good job Talarico? I’m genuinely surprised.

    But yeah, it’s going to spout nonsense. Even ignoring the potential for foul play, it makes shit up even with its “harmless” responses. My point was more that it at least lowers the barrier for people who would have done no research anyway, and those people often tend to lean right.


  • Using ChatGPT (or any LLM) for this purpose is obviously incredibly flawed and very likely to lead towards bias (both intentional by the service provider and unintentional from the training), and in a world of mass misinformation, a chatbot is going to be no better at filtering the facts from the bullshit than a person would be, and we know how good people are at that.

    But if there’s one silver lining: anybody who did no research before who now does this at least is exposed to more perspectives, hopefully. One would imagine this is a possible gateway to further self-directed research.



  • Yep, tokenmaxxing is a thing at some companies now. It often aligns with the same people competing to see who can generate the most lines of slop code (losc, which is different than sloc of course).

    It wasn’t long ago where people understood that every line of code you write is a line of code that could have a bug in it. The good devs still know this, but many are also being forced to generate shitty code just to appease their shitty management now.

    As an aside, I have yet to see a case where tokenmaxxing generates a profit for either the consumer or the provider. It just reeks of the same “market capture at all costs” mindset that have plagued SV startups for so long.







  • From an article linked in this one:

    Via WSVN, Bermudez claims he’s “not against video games, but to go out and get a video game where – which glorifies not only our first responders getting shot, but also pedestrians and residents – it’s nonsensical.”

    Republican sheriff Cordero-Stutz similarly points to GTA’s crime-centric themes, adding: “At a time when law enforcement is working every day to reduce violent crime, prevent robberies and car thefts, combat drug trafficking, and build stronger relationships between our deputies and the communities we serve, I believe we need to seriously consider the message we send when our own government promotes a fictional identity centered around many of those same crimes.”

    Remember, kids. Guns don’t kill people. Games about guns kill people.





  • This. You’d definitely want the cameras to have only the public key. If they’re not doing that, then their security must be as bad as their morals because they know people are tearing these down everywhere already anyway.

    Of course, not using assymetric encryption makes them more auditable by “third parties” which is an unexpected benefit.

    I wonder if they at least use a different key per camera. This would be less necessary for asymmetric encryption, of course, but they don’t seem to be using it. If all the cameras are using the same key, then you can theoretically use the key these people pulled to access data on every other camera as well (possibly remotely if you can remote in somehow).



  • FWIW, this seems ripe for data collection and field testing for free. (unless it’s a paid sub, then that’s worse)

    Exploiting abuse survivors to test a surveillance system is a new low —even for government. 🖕🏼

    Did you even read the article?

    Here, I’ll help you:

    The app’s effectiveness depends on courts ordering suspects to wear electronic tags, something that remains relatively rare in South Korean stalking cases.

    Police arrested 29,404 people on stalking charges across 2024 and 2025. Authorities made 1,187 applications for electronic monitoring during that period, but courts approved only 427.

    Your “surveillance system” is court-ordered ankle monitors for known stalkers. Which, sure, is surveillance. You know, for a convicted stalker.

    Whether the ones who were stalked want to know where their stalker is might be a different story, but there’s this cool thing you can do with apps where you turn off notifications and hide the app somewhere you never go. That way they don’t have to see where the stalker is and they still get the benefit of “if that distance falls below 1km, police and probation authorities receive an alert and contact the victim.”


  • This could be the “new normal” for 2026 and beyond, with monthly totals climbing sharply since mid-year.

    This would require there to constantly be security flaws to patch. Sure, vulnerabilities are inevitable, but steps can be taken proactively to avoid them, and no operating system (most of these vulnerabilities were in Windows) should be introducing an uncontrolled stream of constant vulnerabilities (in many cases against the user’s wishes).

    Anyway, patching security holes is a good thing at least so long as the total surface area of holes actually decreases over time.