apparia

It's not super clear from the article but it sounds like they're saying the "increase" in military activity is just a return to previous levels after a lull? Bit sensationalist if that's the case.

I think this comment is based on an extremely optimistic -- bordering on fantastical -- outlook.

The complexity of dealing with such large amounts of information will keep increasing forever as the amount of information also grows

The capacity and capability to handle the data will grow too.

AI struggles with conflicting information and mistakes, which happen a lot especially when humans are involved, so eventually you will have lots of “garbage in garbage out” issues causing problems

This is what data analysis is though. Extracting patterns from noisy data. Ignoring outliers. I don't think anybody is suggesting they'll just dump a CSV of your web history into ChatGPT and ask it if you're probably going to a protest this weekend (although does it sound so far fetched that that might actually work?), it'll be used in combination with existing and constantly improving data mining techniques.

The data one might be able to track will continuously be challenged or removed on legal/compliance bases over time, reducing its availability

Are you implying data protection laws will not only not be inexorably eroded year upon year by increasingly surveillance-hungry governments, but will actually get a significantly better than their current milquetoast state? I've gotta say, that's seeming increasingly unlikely to me; right now we're seeing mandatory identity verification being legislated on more and more things by more and more governments.

Yes the NSA might want our chatbot logs, but after enough people realize they might be/are getting them, people will stop feeding it as much, or introduce noise on purpose

This has to be a sarcastic reference to Snowden, right? The thing where the entire world found out about the how NSA absolutely is -- not "might be" -- monitoring your internet and conversation logs, and basically nobody did a fucking thing to change? That was 12 years ago.

And the sheer volume of information relative to the computing power necessary to process everything will also become a problem if they keep trying to process every single thing.

Good thing they're not doing anything crazy to get more computing power, like buying up practically the entire global supply of RAM or building data centres at an exponentially increasing rate.

What? They're just computer programs. Almost all computers have high quality entropy sources that can generate truly random numbers. LLMs' whole thing is basically turning sequences of random numbers into sequences of less random stuff that makes sense. They have a built-in dial for nondeterminism, and it's almost never at zero.

I feel like I'm missing your meaning because the literal interpretation is nonsense.

Maybe I'm just tired but this reads like a fucking riddle.

They want to block "app stores" that don't block "AI apps" that don't block "harmful content" from kids?

(And of course it's left lovely and murky what any of those terms actually mean.)

Is it really not as easy for them as saying "hey btw don't use this distro if you're in California" and fully expecting nobody to comply? I'm not sure if Ubuntu is based in Cali in which case I can see it being more difficult.

Also this "age bracket" thing seems to have an obvious flaw in that any application that's running semi-regularly can just poll the API every day and find out the user's DOB by checking when they roll into the next bracket. It's actually leaking more data about children than about adults in that case. Brilliant.

Thanks, honestly I had not actually read the bill before coming here to shitpost, and it seems like yeah it's more well-intentioned than people are giving it credit for.

I still have serious reservations about the broadness, vagueness, and premise that mandatory age signals are a good idea at all -- it's a lateral move at best; weakly attempting to kerb the most overtly predatory parts of the whole "age verification" movement, without opposing the idea itself.

But you're right, it's not the blatant data-vacuuming law that I think some people imagine it to be.

I don't but I roleplayed for the bit.

If it weren't completely, stupidly unenforceable, I might still worry about this idea being exported to the rest of the world though.

What I want to know is: in my own haphazard note-to-self text file cribbed from ArchWiki, is it before or after the disk partitioning step that I'm supposed to add an instruction to "email anthraxx my date of birth"?

Or better yet: at what point in the development of my ad hoc tasking system for an ESP32 do I need to stop and go "shit, guess I'd better add a keypad so 12 year olds can self-report their age and safely be prevented from using the 'romance' setting on this lightbulb"?

It's the wall on the right -- in the wide version (from felesteen.news) it's all the same blue colour, and a corner, whereas in the Reddit version it's a white concrete pillar with no corner.

At the very least, someone's done some infilling on one of them. My most charitable guess was that someone at the news site decided to "punch up" the image for an article header, but the third version and its timing make me think Occam's razor is the way to go here.

Your version was posted within 3 minutes of this post someone linked in the comments of the Reddit version. So yeah, all credibility lost as far as I'm concerned.

What I don't get is why, if this is some sort of coordinated campaign, you wouldn't just generate entirely new images, rather than AI-daydream variants of the exact same one, which makes it obvious they're manipulated.

Nice find, kind of damning. That version has a totally different wall on the right side to the version posted here, it also seems to be from a slightly different angle. This screams AI manipulation -- if not outright fabrication -- of at least one of those images. Doesn't necessarily mean they're both fake, but a pretty big red flag.

Comparison

I was gonna say it on the last thread but, before we start appropriating this image as a political symbol as you've done here, should someone... maybe... source it slightly better than "Reddit"? There's plenty of evidence that the school was blown up, but this specific image -- conveniently well-framed and poignant -- cropped up very quickly on a few random social media accounts, with no photographer attributed, and as far as I know hasn't actually been verified at all.