It’s probably only a matter of time before popular forums lock down even view access to everything except Google, forcing people to use and work with monopolies and shutting out smaller player permanently
The author is right: there is no legitimate justification for WEI
This entire project is to ensure people cant have control of their own systems, because they may act in a way contrary to googles interests (or the governments, or any other party)
The topics become a super valuable fingerprinting metric, as well as continuing a form of cross site tracking now that 3rd party cookies are taken more seriously
Audio cues can be intentionally non specific enough for the client to be able to determine the exact location of the source and for a cheat to overlay the position, tho.
Seriously, you guys see all the overwork, burnout, and abuse of developers for basic fucking features on launch but somehow manage to have nationstate level architecture to prevent cheaters, but oh they just can’t manage to beat the cheaters by not having 3rd party malware and spyware on every connected machine? Some people really here need to grow up and remember the conditions under which these games are made. Games have basically 0 security considerations, proven by their willingness to outsource the entire concept to a 3rd party who can take all the legal liability and at the same time giving us the sorriest excuse for “anti-cheat” while still not solving the problem.
That’s time wasted and you’re usually manipulated into it anyway with cliffhangers and flashy visuals instead of quality content.
If something is going to face plant like game of thrones, I want to know in the beginning before I get invested. All forms of marketing are geared toward hiding those face plants to drive viewership, but it’s the only metric people really care about: is this movie essentially longform clickbait that isn’t going to pay off in the end, like so much of the other shit coming out recently
And the author clearly has no idea what she’s talking about, or the impact of AI on CS.
I use chatgpt regularly to build outlines and boilerplate to code I want to write. Yes it’s code I can’t trust and almost entirely rewrite, but simply the act of it naming the variables saves me time.
And even if it did get to the point of good code, you have to be a developer to know what it created is what you wanted in the first place.
This is fearmongering targeting tech people by claiming their jobs are at the same level of risk of disruption by ai as other white collar jobs (like hers!).
Only a very specific and unfortunately common encryption protocol will be affected by quantum computing.
Prime factorization based encryption is hosed, Elliptic curve cryptography is already the promoted standard and it’s not susceptible to the same issue.
Every problem looks impossible until you see the solution, and then it was obvious the whole time.
The feeling never goes away, instead you do what some other commenters have suggested:
pick a project
get it building locally so you can fix something
pick a bug from the list
get to work. Understanding what to write means understanding what the solution is, which means understanding the problem and the scope of it, what parts you can fix and what not. This process is more akin to going on a nature hike than painting the view, but people always seem to assume coding is more like the latter.
Tbh, you will likely be able to eventually solve any bug, given time and effort. Reaching out to discord groups in the language or product domain when you have questions will speed the process up.
You’re confusing ai with chatgpt, but to answer your question: if it’s my own bias, why would I care that it’s in my personal ai? That’s kind of the point: using my personal lens (bias) to determine what info I would be interested in being alerted of
The largest blockers to implementing them for voting are no longer technological, they’re political
We can absolutely cryptographically verify your voting choice from your phone, and have you and everyone be able to verify when it changed, where, on what device, etc, while also preserving the anonymity of the voter.
(Edit: while also making it far easier to combat fraud by making elections trivial enough to go “ok, everyone go check and resubmit your choices!” And immediately validate the majority of the votes as valid, minus those who don’t have internet access who would still need to travel)
Problem is, there are a lot of very powerful organizations who would suddenly lose much of that power if voting were in any way convenient and accessible to everyone.
Is there a meaningful difference between reproducing the work and giving a summary? Because I’ll absolutely be using AI to filter all the editorial garbage out of news, setup and trained myself to surface what is meaningful to me stripped of all advertising, sponsorships, and detectable bias
Even their excuses if a “24h only event app” don’t hold water
Even in that case, a business would be wanting to make many of those apps, and this commenter is arguing making a new one from scratch every time over massively simplifying things with quality reusable code.
Even their own example shows how terrible it is an idea to deprioritize code quality/readability.
You’ll have to outbid cuckerberg for enough corrupt politicians to do that, and he has a 15 year head start