QA is when you vibe code tests, right
XLE
joined 10 months ago
The entire article can be summed up in 5 words:
an Anthropic official told CNN
Notable other passages include
Logan Graham, who heads the team at Anthropic its AI models’ defenses, told CNN
and
according to Anthropic
And
Anthropic said
And my personal favorite
Anthropic claims... CNN could not immediately verify this figure.
My solution to this is never using OneDrive, which (terrible as it is) can be uninstalled on Windows 10/11.
Mozilla allows the installation of ad blocking extensions on Firefox, and it's already exhibited hostility towards the most talented developer of those extensions.
Aren't you the guy who likes Eliezer Yudkowsky?
If you're worried about brain damage, you're self-inflicting it.
What are the chances the 10-second warning becomes a 90-second unskippable one?
What's more likely: investors suddenly started caring about the environment, or investors are looking for ways to stop losing money on an unprofitable venture?
My bet is on the latter, especially with the context the article provides, and they're just looking for a green parachute.
Until "could" becomes a reality, I will take "did"
There's an interesting reason why, too. It's not because the AI is leftist, but because the JCP is doing effective SEO optimization with their websites, not blocking them from the corporate AI scanners.
It's really easy to abuse AI-targeted SEO, so this could be used way more maliciously in the near future.
Stolen from elsewhere:
Something that is dismaying to me about this situation is that, on one hand, the anti-Collabora arguments are not unconvincing: the situation with Collabora and the foundation seems to have been dubious at best, and I would not be surprised if their legal worries are well-founded.
But on the other, in arguably trying to address the problems, the anti-Collabora side seems to exhibit a distressing lack of honor and decency. The dismissal of voting results that didn't go their way, the malicious misreadings of member votes against their proposals (eg, deciding "If the Board majority group insists on proceeding with this misguided and premature motion, I vote NO" was not a vote against the proposal because the motion was "neither misguided nor premature"), the arguments that complaints about their behavior violate community standards and are are not sufficiently respectful of the work they do, the toxic, patronizing, dismissive statements toward developers and others... even if they are right, I do not understand why they need to behave the way they are behaving.
The earlier threads from the Collabora side were also disappointing in how childish all of their arguments were structured. I read their posts and could barely understand what was being claimed in between all of the sarcasm and attacks, and I wasn't alone in the comments here.
It's nice that OpenAI is being pulled in the for-profit direction and the non-profit direction at the same time, and is threatened with losing (more) money if it fails to do either.