Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)HU
Posts
0
Comments
1,131
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Nobody was saying that you must eat eggs to survive - the point is to show the flaws in the hypothesis of the study when related to the sample group.

    If you are sampling 3000 mothers in New Hampshire and looking for those who eat less poor people food and more rich people food you should expect to see a correlation that can be equally described by socioeconomic status as it can by diet.

  • Coffee, eggs, white rice

    Selection bias much?

    If you don't consume any of those 3 you're probably ridiculously wealthy on some freaky diet.

    All this says to me is "The food of the masses is contaminated" which yeah - we already knew the rich pay a premium to get less contaminated food.

  • It's impossible to do without exposing a private signing cert to everyone, yes. That's the issue.

    You can't do asymmetric key signing anonymously and with a central issuer.

    So either you have to just trust the assertions (0 security) or you have to have a trusted issuer (not anonymous)

    A pseudonym issuer is a trusted issuer. There's no way to do it otherwise. You have to trust someone to make this kind of system work.

  • Most of these make sense and are definitely blockers for this ever releasing but -

    Remove the concept of the Pseudonym Provider and ensure pseudonyms are generated and stored locally without the possibility of linking back to real identities.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but this data all has to be signed somewhere right? Like the eID contains cryptographically signed assertions about the user in some standard (JWT?) format.

    What use is signing the assertions locally? There would be no way to tell if the citizen actually had any valid id at all. A pseudonym provider is the privacy layer that allows for signing of new tokens after ensuring the validity of the old.

    How could you sign an anonymous token using a valid one without it being linked back to the valid one? It seems like impossible constraints.

    Am I totally off base here?

  • It's unclear if the current models can reach that level though. They seem more like they're asymtotically approaching their limit.

    Maybe I'm wrong and GPT 5 will be the end all and be all - but I don't think generalist models will ever be consistent enough. Specialist generators focused on specifics, trained to output very defined data seem more likely to be useful than this attempt to make a single catch all LLM.

  • It's funny how the generators arent getting better. They've plateaued pretty hard in terms of believability. Glance value? Convincing.

    Under any level of scrutiny though this falls apart in at least a dozen ways.

  • ... But not when Joyce writes them. Don't worry he'll reference it again in 200 pages and if you haven't figured out what theme they represent you'll miss the fifth layer of context that actually inverts the meaning of the current paragraph.

    (Ok he's not that obtuse but I wouldn't ever use death of the author/blue curtains on Joyce)

  • He won by 7k votes in an election with 21% registered voter turnout.

    He won not by broad appeal but rather by apathy - his voters were engaged by fear mongering bait plastered on every news outlet about "crime" so they elected a goose stepping cop.