This was a proposal a few years ago for how to enforce "trusted web". Basically, a way for service providers to verify, at a per request basis, that the client is using an unmodified software stack, starting with an operating system signed by a trusted developer. Could absolutely be modified to enforce this shit.
I've seen a lot of people saying how this will be unenforceable and so isn't something we need to worry about.
Except this could be enforced. Google came out with a proposal a few years ago for a method of validating the a request came from a "trusted" (aka, signed and with secure boot enabled OS), ostensibly to combat bot traffic. They dropped it after push back, but it still provides a blueprint for how this could be enforced.
If web platforms are mandated by law to enforce something like this then the web could be effectively restricted to only approved operating systems. There could still be a dark web, but with the weight of the law behind it, once anything gained momentum access to it could be shut down at the service provider layer.
This shouldn't be dismissed as a threat because it's "unenforceable", because it is.
As long as you're using up to date TLS protocols and algorithms, it's great for encryption in transit but isn't going to do anything (out of the box at least) for encryption of data at rest, but if you just disable chat logging on the server that's not really an issue. Clients can still store insecure copies of chats, but that's an issue with every secure messenger.
This is pretty conclusively addressed by the Bell Inequalities and empirically tested. It's absolutely counter-intuitive and feels "wrong" but it is definitely how our universe operates.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9OM0jSTeeBg
A relatively short but decent explainer for Bell's Theorem and the Nobel prize winning experiment to successfully test it.
The important distinction here (and I get it, analogies are always imperfect) is that the photograph analogy has "hidden variables". That is, each half is fixed at the moment of their separation and you just don't know what's in the envelopes until you open one. That's not how entangled particles work though, and which "half" is which is not determined until the instant of measurement, at which point the state of both are known and fixed.
So then your counter to someone bringing attention to the fact that LLMs are actively telling people (vulnerable people, due to reasons that you've pointed out), is that it isn't the singular contributing factor?
I get what you're saying here, and I think everyone else does too? I don't want to just be entirely dismissive and say "no shit" but I'm curious as to what it is you want or expect out of this? Do you take offense at people pushing back at harmful LLMs? Do you want people to care more about creating a kinder society? Do you think these things are somehow incompatible?
Of course LLMs aren't driving people to suicide in a vacuum, no one is claiming that. Clearly though, when taken within the larger context of the current scale of mental health crisis, having LLMs that are encouraging people to commit suicide is a bad thing that we should absolutely be making noise about.
Different types of AI. What you say is true for LLMs and other generative AI but noise reduction and up scaling algorithms are of a different class and don't rely on stolen training data to function.
Sure. It's important to first realize that the * character is not read by tar, but by your shell which first expands it into a list of files/directories that are then passed into tar to process. In the first command you are asking your shell to expand all (implicitly non-hidden) files in the listed directories. In the second you are doing the same, but one level up.
What happens then is that when tar is given a directory as an input to a create command, it will include everything in that directory hidden files included. This is why the second command worked as you expected. In the first command you are providing tar with an explicit list of files which does not include those which are hidden due to how shell glob expansion works.
You can do a set -x before running these commands and this will show you the exact command line after shell expansion before execution. That should give a clearer view of why you see different behavior.
You're right that light is not "a wave and a particle depending on whether you observe it". Instead, light is a quantized field. It is a field because it exists at every point and allows for wave-like behavior such as superposition and interference (both things seen in all fields, like waves in water or radio, etc.). But it is quantized because when the field interacts it does so via photons which can only exist in integer quantities. This quantization of interaction of the underlying continuous field gives us all the "weirdness" we see. Okay, not quite all of it, there are still even weirder parts of quantum mechanics, but it does explain the double slit experiment.
Measured boot requires secure boot to be enabled as one of its components.
The real value of measured boot is when paired with full disk encryption as it protects against boot loader attacks that can compromise your sealed keys.
I've made less than 50 comments on Lemmy and none were very popular and yet I made the list? Maybe some kinda keyword thing. Strange.
That the fossil record is incomplete
https://github.com/explainers-by-googlers/Web-Environment-Integrity
This was a proposal a few years ago for how to enforce "trusted web". Basically, a way for service providers to verify, at a per request basis, that the client is using an unmodified software stack, starting with an operating system signed by a trusted developer. Could absolutely be modified to enforce this shit.
I've seen a lot of people saying how this will be unenforceable and so isn't something we need to worry about.
Except this could be enforced. Google came out with a proposal a few years ago for a method of validating the a request came from a "trusted" (aka, signed and with secure boot enabled OS), ostensibly to combat bot traffic. They dropped it after push back, but it still provides a blueprint for how this could be enforced.
https://github.com/explainers-by-googlers/Web-Environment-Integrity
If web platforms are mandated by law to enforce something like this then the web could be effectively restricted to only approved operating systems. There could still be a dark web, but with the weight of the law behind it, once anything gained momentum access to it could be shut down at the service provider layer.
This shouldn't be dismissed as a threat because it's "unenforceable", because it is.
As long as you're using up to date TLS protocols and algorithms, it's great for encryption in transit but isn't going to do anything (out of the box at least) for encryption of data at rest, but if you just disable chat logging on the server that's not really an issue. Clients can still store insecure copies of chats, but that's an issue with every secure messenger.
Wasn't that part of the plot of the Matrix?
This is pretty conclusively addressed by the Bell Inequalities and empirically tested. It's absolutely counter-intuitive and feels "wrong" but it is definitely how our universe operates.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9OM0jSTeeBg A relatively short but decent explainer for Bell's Theorem and the Nobel prize winning experiment to successfully test it.
The important distinction here (and I get it, analogies are always imperfect) is that the photograph analogy has "hidden variables". That is, each half is fixed at the moment of their separation and you just don't know what's in the envelopes until you open one. That's not how entangled particles work though, and which "half" is which is not determined until the instant of measurement, at which point the state of both are known and fixed.
So then your counter to someone bringing attention to the fact that LLMs are actively telling people (vulnerable people, due to reasons that you've pointed out), is that it isn't the singular contributing factor?
I get what you're saying here, and I think everyone else does too? I don't want to just be entirely dismissive and say "no shit" but I'm curious as to what it is you want or expect out of this? Do you take offense at people pushing back at harmful LLMs? Do you want people to care more about creating a kinder society? Do you think these things are somehow incompatible?
Of course LLMs aren't driving people to suicide in a vacuum, no one is claiming that. Clearly though, when taken within the larger context of the current scale of mental health crisis, having LLMs that are encouraging people to commit suicide is a bad thing that we should absolutely be making noise about.
Is the argument here that anti-AI folks are hypocrites because people can be bad too sometimes? That's a remarkably childish and simple take.
Different types of AI. What you say is true for LLMs and other generative AI but noise reduction and up scaling algorithms are of a different class and don't rely on stolen training data to function.
Divorced :(
Well I know these people and they're great plus they're married now :)
Sure. It's important to first realize that the * character is not read by tar, but by your shell which first expands it into a list of files/directories that are then passed into tar to process. In the first command you are asking your shell to expand all (implicitly non-hidden) files in the listed directories. In the second you are doing the same, but one level up.
What happens then is that when tar is given a directory as an input to a create command, it will include everything in that directory hidden files included. This is why the second command worked as you expected. In the first command you are providing tar with an explicit list of files which does not include those which are hidden due to how shell glob expansion works.
You can do a
set -xbefore running these commands and this will show you the exact command line after shell expansion before execution. That should give a clearer view of why you see different behavior.You're right, I had it wrong. Misinformation deleted.
You're right that light is not "a wave and a particle depending on whether you observe it". Instead, light is a quantized field. It is a field because it exists at every point and allows for wave-like behavior such as superposition and interference (both things seen in all fields, like waves in water or radio, etc.). But it is quantized because when the field interacts it does so via photons which can only exist in integer quantities. This quantization of interaction of the underlying continuous field gives us all the "weirdness" we see. Okay, not quite all of it, there are still even weirder parts of quantum mechanics, but it does explain the double slit experiment.
Measured boot requires secure boot to be enabled as one of its components.
The real value of measured boot is when paired with full disk encryption as it protects against boot loader attacks that can compromise your sealed keys.
Ahkshually that would be the K'Chain Nah'ruk, not the Che'Malle