Chopping up the ship to sell for firewood while you are sailing on it.

I am not sure if you are a student of history but twice before the Germans decided to go to war and have as their foe the world.

I am not sure 1.5m Germans all deciding on a single course of action is something to be happy about.

That is exactly the point, LLM aim to simulate the chaotic best guess flow of the human mind, to be conscious and at least present the appearance of thinking and from that to access and process facts but not be a repository of facts in themselves. The accusation here that the model constructed a fact and then built on it is missing the point, this is exactly the way organic minds work. Human memory is constantly reworked and altered based on fresh information and simple musings and the new memory taken as factual even while it is in large part fabricated, and to an increasing extent over time. Many of our memories of past events bear only cursory fidelity to the actual details of the events themselves to the point that they could be defined as imagined. We still take these imagined memories as real and act upon them exactly as has been done here by the AI model.

Google: ‘I am bored, today lets make ourselves a legitimate target in a war’.

See that bandwagon over there, I am going to jump on it.

But everyone already is on it.

Merde.

deleted by creator

Is there not some flaw in this logic in that you are asked to decide if you wish to see a photograph before you have viewed it. Maybe we need an additional app on top of the Safety Core, called something like Android SneakPeek that lets you have a quick flash.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I am unsure so much should be spoken of innovation here, good luck to those Chinese researchers but DeepSeek really only is KhatGTP.

How about domestic then, we promise not to make domestic killer robots for urban pacification, read control. Unless the domestic population requires it of course. Or we deem it necessary ourselves, or we feel like it. Your compliance with this message is assumed by the act of reading it.

I remember when the motto was do no evil, now it is we promise not to make killer robots.

You only indulge in this sort of faff if you are having an existential crisis.

When it is easy everyone thinks they are Oskar Schindler but when it is hard most people are Hugo Boss.

‘So this feels like a hostile takeover of the machinery of governments by the richest man in the world’, they call that a coup.

I have a still working updated 4a which I use for a second phone account I have because it is so pleasant to carry around. I bought it late in the 4a production cycle and I think it must therefore have a battery that is different in some way to that included with earlier models and that is the reason the update did not brick my phone. I think what happened here is Google knew of a flash bang fault in those batteries which touch on wood later ones did not have so sent a targeted update to hash those specific early devices for safety. The question is not did Google intentionally scupper those phones but when did it know about the fault. My guess is it discovered it during production and that is why later models are altered and now remain usable after the update. The upshot of that is Google had some idea they were faulty very early on but chose not to recall them then but instead only disable them very late in their life. This is just speculation of course, I could just have been lucky and Google could have just recently found some fault with aging batteries.

Yes as with almost everything the ability to do a thing is just a function of how much you want to do it.

You can always see the signal in the noise, that is the point of the signal and therein lies the rub.

It will all end with us back on dialup speeds once the counter-DAITA throughput machine learning de-obfuscation analysis of defense against AI guided traffic analysis of proxy anomised packets starts. I think I might just read a book.