alottafagina

joined 4 weeks ago
[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

When you enter the wipe passcode, iirc the screen flashes and the phone reboots / wipes - that's how they were clued in that he 'did something' and that's why he's being charged and faces 5y in prison for the act.

A hidden wipe would have prevented this.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 33 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Called bullshit as soon as I read they were accusing him of kiddie stuff.

This is why GrapheneOS's passcode feature is more likely to land you in trouble - it's too "hostile"

I'd rather it load an empty profile while it wipes everything in the background.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

I've recently been pondering the future impact of AI on coding, while trying to filter out the current noise surrounding the issue (since all it does is muddy the waters). There's a lot of amateurish supposition to follow, but since you appear to be getting fewer thought out responses than "AI-bad-kill", take it with a pinch of salt.

There was a recent article on the open source software that props up the internet - (paraphrasing here) one of these repositories had (pre-AI) a user called Jin Yue or Jin Yin who made hundreds of useful pull requests, gained the trust of the repo maintainer and was eventually given admin privileges, only to surrepticiously merge malicious code when no one was looking (eventually discovered ~a month after the fact). I imagine that (likely) state-sponsored attempts like these will make more use of AI in the future for quicker turnaround, and that maintainers will also eventually use AI to quickly audit submitted code for security flaws.

As far as open source software channels are concerned, I imagine there will be a decent amount of low effort malicious software that makes heavy use of AI, submitted to these channels. In such an environment, whether or not users are permitted to candidly disclose AI usage without reprisal will likely make a huge difference, since honest disclosure would invite security-minded people to audit fault-prone AI-assisted code - something that malware distributers will try to avoid at all costs (thereby allowing a distinction that can be leveraged to form between the two).

Just my two cents.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Even considering rhetorical goals and context, without "I particularly dislike this guy", it's an enormous leap to twist those words that way.

Stop blaming the pandas.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 days ago

Thanks for your contribution to the pile.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

Then you've missed the point of the change entirely. Splitting email addresses into public and private-facing addresses is one thing. Reusing passwords is entirely another evin if both are related to securtity.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

asking if he used AI on the project is a valid question

Maybe in some scenarios, but reducing years of his work to "how vibey is your code?" with no inquiry whatsoever on the finer technical aspects of his work is telling. They don't care. They're more interested in "Are you on my side of the AI wars?", forcing the issue, because that's the only 'contribution' they can make to the discussion.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago

One example.

Got something that has more than 18 participants split into 3 groups for a total sample size of 6 people per control group? Not to mention its focus on AI assisted essay writing, measuring cognitive debt (not decline), using EEG to infer performance of higher cognitive function, etc.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago (19 children)

Vague criticisms, fallacious reasoning, highly emotive language, little response to attempts at discussion (though some might engage in disingenuous discussions of shifting goalposts here and there to discourage particularly vocal engagees from future participation). So I'd say that Linus is just the latest convenient scapegoat in an Anti-AI 'trend' that will have little impact on the rate of AI adoption in the long run.

Sucks that I waited until now to try to form a measured opinion on AI because now all the discussions on the internet are hot garbage.

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

AI use demonstrably leads to cognitive decline

source?

[–] alottafagina@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

Man I've seen others try to twist those words the same way even though it's on the same level as one of those elementary reasoning problems you'd find on a basic IQ test (Jack caught an std after interacting with koalas - a) all koalas transmit stds, b) some koalas transmit stds, c) pandas are free from stds, d) Jack should spend more than $5 on his hookers).

So unless you actually are stupid and this is why you're choosing to (defensively) misinterpret his words by picking the equivalent of c) here, it's clearly wilful misrepresentation of a very reasonable statement - "Of the people I admire, most don't shy away from cutting edge sutff"

view more: next ›