Unfortunately there's so much dishonesty and manipulation happening on the internet as of late, I feel like we've all become a bit distrustful of anything at first glance. I wouldn't take it personally. Best of luck with your project.

If you're distrustful of anything, why do you trust the number of git stars? It's something easily botted after all.

As someone who was a teen around the advent of smartphones, I'm only just now learning how important it is to unplug. It's wonderful, give it a try.

That's also the biggest plot-hole in the first Star Wars movie. Princess Leia is supposed to be this righteous noble of the moral resistance and yet she STEALS the Death Star plans!

I don't get the impression that anyone writing about this thinks it's legal. I think the argument would be that it's justified.

Then why bother using that language? The camera doesn't need rescuing, why not just "we took".

Also, is it really justified? Did we learn anything useful here that we didn't already know? There's more effective ways to push back against Flock, townships (like my own) are having plenty of success stories without stealing anything.

You don't think maybe it's just a little bit tongue-in-cheek? Maybe a reference to how the US Military sometimes goes into foreign countries saying we'll be greeted as liberators?

“I kept trying to explain in between haymakers that we were better than this and on top of that it wasn’t likely to be ruled on favorably as far as the courts.” - Luke O’Neil https://flaminghydra.com/the-end-and-after-2/

> You should be able to own that if you're going to do something like this.

Um, are you saying the hackers should admit they broke the law? Or that Flock should righteously own the data they collect?

Either way, I d/c. Flock cameras are probably insecure, and their data is potentially dangerous.

Bad laws exist, and following them may be prudent at times, but the act of following them isn't a moral imperative.

liberation is often used to refer to something that, while technically legal, the people that are subject to it did not agree to

But we own the cameras

No we don't, even if our taxes paid for them. You don't own public buildings either, that's not how it works.

But sir, we liberated them

It's ma'am, and no you stole them.

Anything becomes permissible when you believe yourself to be “on the right side of history.”

And my privacy? The threat to democracy? Does Flock own that? Why is always the poors that need to own morality?

You can go a long while without your trash being taken away for you.. you can't go very long without food.

Most of the food the farmers produce in the Netherlands is exported.

Meanwhile, trash piles up quickly: https://nltimes.nl/2023/02/07/utrecht-garbage-strike-comes-e...

Without European farmers having so much political capital we could just import food from unsubsidized farmers..

Yes, that's what they went on to point out.

Worst thing that's ever happened to me is having processes randomly killed by the OOM killer. Could be unpleasant if you're writing an email or document that suddenly disappears because your app got killed.

The OOM killer usually kills the process that's using the most memory, which is the reason the system is OOM. Sometimes this can be adjusted. When I'm OOM it's almost always because some runaway loop used 50GB and it makes no sense to kill any other process.

If it's killing your email editor then your email editor is bloated or you just need more RAM - or swap.

Web browsers are most people's email editor.. and yes those things do use a lot of RAM.

As someone who supports some bottom of the barrel "regular users".. they aren't monkeys. They have brains that function enough to process "oh, I shouldn't do that again".

Nitpick: monkeys have enough brains for "oh, I shouldn't do that again".

Is that really an important detail? I think what I said got my point across.

My brain stuck on the inaccurate monkey comparison and caused unnecessary work to get past it and back onto the point you were making.

Sometimes you guys think too much..

A better analogy would have reduced required thought. But here we are.

Yes, it's disrespectful to monkeys. Monkeys have feelings too.

Well if one reads my comment I'll consider apologizing.

Also, the one thing that's important above all else in industrial automation is reliability. If your LLM doesn't know about one tiny little detail that ends up causing your product to fail, your customers start losing money and you can no longer point the finger at your PLC manufacturer. Make bad gambles like that and you won't be in business for long.

All the providers you mention here work with the US government in situations where their platforms are being used by terrorist organizations. It sounds like the a/i folks are specifically offering free services to a militant group, so that's why they're being sanctioned. I don't think your argument flies.

if the argument is harm reduction and reducing the overall incidence of terrorism, my argument flies.

Removing all the oxygen from our atmosphere would kill 100% of terrorists, that's a good strategy too right?

indeed, that would be a very effective way to reduce terrorism to 0.

My point is, most people are looking for strategies that actually make sense. Shutting down Google to stop terrorism, even when Google is already cooperating with the US government, makes no sense.

And if the terrorist group that provides the impetus for the sanction is practically nonexistent, it's entirely sensical?

They aren't specifically supporting terrorism, and in fact are cooperating with the US to stop terrorist groups. This isn't an ends justifies the means situation, as I was trying to illustrate with the oxygen/atmosphere metaphor.

You took a look at 5 posts made on one single day and then categorized all of the other days.. seems like you're good at categorizing with a broad brush yourself. Based on my experience as a pretty heavy HN consumer, I'm with the article author.

The inclusion of the Apple News story is sufficient to know that probably the classification here isn’t too tight. It’s not really against the article author to point this out, either, just trying to add color for the forum here. It’s not always us vs them.

Well what I said wasn't really against you either, I was just being cheeky.

You took all of one comment to categorize a person, and closed with your subjective experience.

Based on my experience, this isn’t typically done for kind reasons.

But what do I know, I am but one dumb monkey pushing tokens through tubes to what claim to be other monkeys but might be nothing of the sort.

You took a look at all of one comment of a user and categorized them as unkind. Som'n som'n broad brush bad

Fwiw I think Waymo's self-driving AI model blog post and the piece about people using AI to mass produce ads on Apple News are fairly categorized. And the "50% of HN is or is about AI" tagline feels accurate enough.

There is so much more to tech than artificial intelligence (for that matter, there's is so much more to AI than LLMs) but even when having discussions about those other matters it feels like AI is still discussed

The Waymo one definitely is AI, the original point here was that it was AI not just LLMs. The Apple News one really is about fraud and AI as the mechanism is just a sign of the times.

If you think I'm being unkind then I think you're abnormally sensitive.

Or you may be just a bit too rude. Happens often around here—as it always tend to be in forums where people go to feel smarter and try to pose as almighty greybeards.

Next time don’t frame it as close. A telltale sign of true intelligence is not making others feel dumb so that you can feel like the big kahuna. ;)

what was rude? I was just being cheeky guys, yeesh.. yall need to lighten up.

Welcome to the future of the internet. Donate some social credits to a starving open-source maintainer and we might let you off with a warning

I can’t reply to your other comment asking what was rude so replying here. I don’t actually think your comment was rude. (You were replying to my account.)

I do think your comment was creating an “us vs them” frame (“I’m with the author”) when my original commment was just trying to add color.

you’re welcome to believe whatever helps you through the day.

Right back at you. You're the one acting like you know that my motives are unkind as if you know me and my sense of humor, you're the one who's offbase here buddy. By the way, a girl called you sensitive.

You seem a little upset.

Okay dude, whatever you say.

If you like.