I wonder when the first AI-only discussion group will be created by an autonomous AI agent, and other agents invited to it, without any knowledge of it by their human operators?
(I seriously can't believe that I'm musing about this as a serious scenario. It sounds ridiculous, but it feels to me somewhat plausible.)
> Which is actually why the "files and folders" metaphor is apt.
It's a starting point, but I certainly wouldn't say it's the best metaphor that there could be. The idea of subfolders just doesn't make sense in a filing cabinet analogy, because you have to consider paper size - any folder which could fit into another folder is not going to be able to contain your regularly sized documents.
People understand hierarchy. That named file is in a folder in a particular drawer of a particular cabinet in a particular room of a particular building in a particular neighborhood in a...
What some people struggle with is recursive hierarchy where each step doesn't change the kind of container. I guess they never saw a Matryoshka doll when they were little.
> The idea of subfolders just doesn't make sense in a filing cabinet analogy,
Sure it does. The document is located in Building C, Sub-basement 2, Room 123, cabinet 415, folder labeled "Accounts". And a physical folder can certainly contain other folders. Nit-picking the analogy wastes everyone's time.
> I get the desire not to do that because you want to verify everything they do, but you can still do that by reviewing the code later on without the pain of step-by-step approvals.
It's a well-known truth in software development that programmers hate having to maintain code written by someone else. We see all the ways in which they wrote terrible code, that we obviously would never write. (In turn, the programmers after us will do the same thing to our code.)
Having to get into the mindset of the person writing the code is difficult and tiring, but it's necessary in order to realise why they wrote things the way they did - which in turn helps you understand the problems they were solving, and why the code they wrote actually isn't as terrible in context as it looked at first glance.
I think it makes sense that this would also apply to the use of generative AI when programming - reviewing the entire codebase after it's already been written is probably more error-prone and difficult than following along with each individual step that went into it, especially when you consider that there's no singular "mindset" you can really identify from AI-generated output. That code could have come from anywhere...
The current registration occurred in 1999. Typically, domain registrations are extended in yearly multiples, which can be seen by the fact that it expires on October 10th, the same day that it was registered.
If it expired in 2025, then that expiration would have occurred in October.
That said, you are probably correct that it wasn't a hacker as such. GoDaddy was indeed offering it for sale in February, according to a Reddit thread from that month[0]. That makes me wonder why...
Not to mention that the "concession", such that it is, will presumably only work if you sign into a Google account. Presumably, this will require that you have Google Play Services installed.
Of course, many people who want to de-Google their phones won't want to do either. This is an attack on people who want to keep their lives separate from Google.
It's worth noting, though, that that config option was only introduced in kernel version 6.8! Before then the option didn't exist and you could write with impunity to mounted devices (as root, obviously).
I have to wonder how this will impact their partnership with Motorola. Presumably, Motorola will have more difficulty if they're found not to be complying with relevant law...
I hope GrapheneOS isn't completely banking on their partnership succeeding. If Motorola devices ever became the only devices that GrapheneOS works on, and it's being done with Motorola's blessing, then it could be more easily legislated out of existence.
I wholeheartedly support GrapheneOS but, because of that, I very much hope they don't box themselves into a corner that's then easy to 'wall off'.
Having said that, the hardware being restricted to Pixel devices was always a tenuous proposition based on Google's design choices. If Pixels remain supported whilst adding Motorola, that's only a good thing.
Google's Pixels have been one of the most open Smartphone hardware lines though. Only a small handful of vendors support Android Verified Boot with custom keys.
But that's why they said it was tenuous. Google's Pixels have been one of the most open Smartphone hardware lines so far, but Google could change that at any time.
GrapheneOS did not wall off itself or anyone else. The lobbyists who wrote those laws walled themselves off. I think they need to pay for the damage they caused with those laws privately. That way they will stop acting as lobbyists for private entities such as Meta.
I think that's worse than reinstalling because there could be a non-persistent exploit in the secure element allowing a malicious OS to fake attestation
Why dont they just offload the legal burden onto the users with a "Enter your * or decline" and move on? Taking this half compromizing position is easier to defend i think.
Not really, thousand of sellers are selling products in places they "shouldn't", law and enforcement of law is very different (average Aliexpress seller will sell you counterfeit product and ship to the US and just wouldn't care), and some website/business owners just have balls, GrapheneOS could just relocate the company to some offshore jurisdiction and sell only through a bunch of third-parties that wouldn't care about local laws at first.
Well, it is also time to fix those laws. I don't think lobbyists should be allowed to cause us harm here and force us to surrender our data to private entities.
are you sure GrapheneOS will be preinstalled on these devices? as I understand there will be two options for these devices, own Lenovo ROM or GrapheneOS, all they have to do to avoid market restrictions is sell it officially with Lenovo ROM and let user install officially supported Graphene by themselves
Before yt-dlp started recommending Deno as its JavaScript runtime, I had no idea it even existed.
Since then, I know that it's there and that it's more secure than Node in some applications, and I can see using it being a good option. But it sounds like it might be too little too late? Going by this article, at least.
Same, I remember googling Deno and going "Oh this new thing looks neat" - and then I haven't heard/seen/read a thing about it until this post. But I keep hearing about Bun and of course nodejs.
Feel bad for them, they obviously just didn't capture a real userbase. I expect if yt-dlp hadn't started to require it they'd have just silently flamed out.
If you haven't already, check out https://pouet.net/ . It's almost certainly got the demos that you're interested in.
Now, remembering the titles of these demos might be another matter, but there are people who might be able to help with that too. Do you remember some scenes/effects from the demos that you were interested in?
I wonder when the first AI-only discussion group will be created by an autonomous AI agent, and other agents invited to it, without any knowledge of it by their human operators?
(I seriously can't believe that I'm musing about this as a serious scenario. It sounds ridiculous, but it feels to me somewhat plausible.)
reply