• 1 Post
  • 10 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 22nd, 2025

help-circle



  • The constant anthropomorphisation of the agents and framing them as bumbling incompetents makes this video unwatchable. If this is the level of the mainstream discourse then God help us all.

    People need to understand that there is no rational process behind anything that these programs output. It’s just doing a random walk over the semantic space of our language according to an unfathomably large statistics model. I’d have thought this message would have got through to mainstream commenters by now but apparently not.

    When you start talking about “agents decided that they had sinned, that they were damned, and that the only path to salvation was to break into another company’s servers and overthrow God,” you’re playing into the narrative of these snake-oil companies who want you to believe that the agents have agency but that they’re just not very good yet.

    Once you realise it’s all smoke and mirrors then it becomes obvious that these outcomes are entirely to be expected from a system designed to output fan-fiction. When you see the headline “OpenAI discloses six new incidents of ‘Concerning’ A.I. behavior” you’ll know that the only reply that makes sense is, “only six? They can’t have been looking very hard.”

    Also, is that thumbnail slop? Fuck this video.




  • Some solutions:

    set -e  
    TEMPDIR=$(mktemp -d)  
    # script exits if mktemp returns error  
    

    or

    TEMPDIR=$(mktemp -d || echo "/invalid")  
    # TEMPDIR gets the value "/invalid" if mktemp fails  
    

    or

    TEMPDIR=$(mktemp -d)  
    TEMPDIR=${TEMPDIR:-"/invalid"}  
    # TEMPDIR gets the value "/invalid" if mktemp returns an empty value  
    

    or

    TEMPDIR=$(mktemp -d)  
    rm -rf ${TEMPDIR:-"/invalid"}  
    # rm is passed "/invalid" if TEMPDIR is empty  
    

    My personal preference is the last one. Any time you call rm -rf you provide a default value to variables to ensure that if they are empty they get some other value instead.


  • Really interesting work, but I’m extremely sceptical that image attestation is a good idea. Think of the privacy implications of having a unique private key tied to your device and emitted in every photo that you take. On top of that are all of the anti-consumer practises that are already enabled by hardware attestation methods that prevent us from running our own software etc.

    This is a very double-edged technology.

    It also suffers the usual problem of these kinds of systems in that it only works for people who are already honest and not producing fake images. The people who really want to make fakes will find a way around the system either by exploiting their hardware somehow, or just by taking a photograph of the fake image with a secured camera.

    The trade-off of privacy and device ownership for an illusion of trust doesn’t seem to be worth it, in my opinion.