I have an inclination to downvote this but also to upvote it cuz it is kinda unpopular.
To OP: rationality and beliefs towards something unseen/unproven are not mutually exclusive. Please don’t only judge something by what it is, but by what it means to people, what its consequences are. Beliefs can result in both horrific consequences, as well as needed by some to create wonderful outcomes, even save lives.
As much as I despise snap, this instance bring some questions into how other popular cross-linux platform app stores like flathub and nix-channels/packages provide guardrails against malwares.
I’m aware flathub has a “verified” checks for packages from the same maintainers/developers, but I’m unsure about nix-channels. Even then, flathub packages are not reviewed by anyone, are they?
Great explanation. Two question, what’s the likelihood of an SSO page being spoofed? This seems like an all-eggs-in-one-basket sitch, so what are the potential threats to this?
which of the posts didn’t work on archive.org wayback machine? I tried your post “How Can You Clean the Air” and it worked, though took a bit of time due to a couple of redirecting
I remember reading that this may be already happening to some extent, eg people sharing tips on creating it on the deep web, maybe through prompt engineer, fine tuning or pretraining.
I don’t know how those models are made, but I do wonder the ones that need retraining/finetuning by using real csam can be classified as breaking the law.
In the web version, there should be a button (eg see https://lemmy.world/post/1067695). On mobile apps, my guess is it depends. I usually do it manually, the old copy-and-paste, and also provide the link to the original post.
lol I know you’re kidding, but there’s implication of those willing to get things implanted. Society seems to run on hype nowadays. Look at AI and how fast people are jumping on board with trying it, sometimes out of FOMO. Not to say there’s no merit, but if that FOMO feeling spreads real quick, without proper guardrails, Musk will eventually get what he wants.
so u’re implying there’s potential corruption? or is there a scenario things are still legal but his (or his people’s) influence is somehow large enough to push it to be approved?
I really wonder if the FDA publishes the reviews and also the names of the reviewers. The latter may be a stretch and potentially abusive. But the former, if available, might make it easier for outside scientists to further inspect.
I dont have any experience with understanding SEC forms either. Is there a repository for SEC forms? Or do you imagine looking at all companies website to mine for those forms?
thanks! I was actually looking at it at some point, though I’m not sure how updated this is for lesser known corps.
I was looking at IAC and Matchgroup (aka owner of Tinder), they’re supposed to be separated but in littlesis it says IAC owns 85% stake. I’m also looking into products they own, eg Tinder, which is not available on littlesis. It’d be interesting if somehow this can Wikidata can be linked.
Thanks, this is a great idea! With a quick look, this seems possible for big enough organizations, but might be spotty for others. I’ll take a closer look. Would be nice if there’s linkage to other database, such as the other commenter’s suggestion of littlesis.
I have an inclination to downvote this but also to upvote it cuz it is kinda unpopular.
To OP: rationality and beliefs towards something unseen/unproven are not mutually exclusive. Please don’t only judge something by what it is, but by what it means to people, what its consequences are. Beliefs can result in both horrific consequences, as well as needed by some to create wonderful outcomes, even save lives.