We don't understand the brain. We fully understand what LLM are doing, humans built them. The idea we don't understand what LLMs are doing is magical. Magical is good for clicks and fundraising.
Been WFH for many years, but I can understand why some companies prefer (demand) in office. Sorry, but unless its written into employment law, no-one has a "right" to it.
I would think this could be a perk that companies could use to get an advantage in hiring. Although, maybe those who it appeals to on the whole may be lower performers?
I’d also distinguish between the hacker to gets access to a forbidden system out of curiosity or for a challenge, from a person who pays a ddos service to attack someone they don’t like (one of the accused actions of this kid).
The latter displays no competency in hacking or cybersecurity, only the attempt to harm another.
My concern in their access to secure government systems is not their hacking competency (which has not been demonstrated), but their sociopathy which has.
Sociopathy is a very strong word, but they do show a pattern of criminal and anti-social behavior. This is not too uncommon in teens, and many young problem kids reform into good members of society either by being shown consequences for their negative behavior, or more or less naturally "mellowing out".
The issue here is that these kids seem to fail upwards, and as you say, get rewarded for anti-social behavior, which sets them on a terrible path for the future. In the Com chat log shared in the article, they made fun of Edward Coristine for his complete lack of programming skills, and the other "doxxed" members of the DOGE team have some smaller projects online as well. If that's the kind of code SpaceX and Tesla run on, I'd give all of their projects a very wide berth.
The guy who bought a DDOS and got fired from an anti-DDOS company for leaking secrets to a rival is an ex-Wall Street multimillionaire's son. He's never going to fail any way but up.
Maybe because nobody really asked for these things gemoji and "rewrite my email".
Neural nets are a foundational technology there should be a ecosystem of apps based on it. People pay 1500$ for an iphone because it has apps, not to call and text people. I think its coming and Apple can't just NOT do AI, so I get it, but it will take a little time.
Facinating software although I hope the idea "we're gonna rely on people to be good humans and DO THE RIGHT THING" is quickly abandoned and instead there is just as robust development of detection software that goes along with newer and better deep fake tools.
I dream of a world where a web of trust signatures are taken seriously. A few hops should get you to a real human holding the camera who claims it's a real recording. If that person or someone along the way is regularly flagged as malicious by others that you trust, you can blacklist them.
I think the terminal solution to this, in the US and maybe the EU, will be putting identifying code/chips into all devices capable of connecting to the Internet that will tag all content (video, text, audio, images) in some way where browsers will have to legally change to interpret them. This will make everyone either unable to use the Internet or known to anyone that "needs to know".
We were still using 5 1/4”, but the school CS teacher had a special press that cut a notch into the 360K (?) ones to trick the Apple II’s into using them in 720K mode.
She also had a utility to copy original software disks onto the “high density” disks, then read back the data.
From what I could tell, it worked like a charm. 10% of the copies failed, but whatever.
(Coursework was stored on unmodified disks, of course.)
The special press was fancy! I used a hole punch (the type intended for punching small round holes in paper), and as long as you lined it up correctly it worked great.
I suspect you're thinking of the Amstrad Spectrum +2 (grey, largely the same as the Sinclair ZX Spectrum 128) vs Amstrad Spectrum +2A (black, contained a +3 motherboard minus the FDD controller, and less compatible with external peripherals).
> You just can't find enough faculty to meet the high standards.
Sorry, but this is ridiculous. Many/most PhDs who want a faculty position will never be able to get one because the availability of jobs is so low. There's really no shortage of potential faculty members.
I can’t find the study, but all the inflation in tuition can be basically be traced back to everything but increasing educational staffing (in other words all the incremental spending goes to new new sports complexes, administrators, etc.)…
Always felt that the ability to think was indicative of academic success.
But also a good SAT for (those not naturally brilliant = most of us) also a positive indication of the student work ethic (to study for the test).
The problem I believe with the disadvantged students argument, which I believe to be a very real problem - is that lowering the standards wrt the test scores - is just a bad solution to a real problem.
Poor students do sit at a disadvantage - but the fix is much more difficult and complicated, and involves that child's entire life experience until they become 17 or 18 y/old. No one has a handle on how to fix it.
I get the feeling smart + hard work will come back into fashion when it comes to academic opportunities.
It's also risky to take on debt if there is a higher chance of not graduating. Being admitted on a lower score might come back to bite the student. There's no substitute for actually having a handle on the subject matter. The fix is to help students before they start lagging.
Testing and QA is great and all however there is something to be gained from a CompSci education besides making more money for the company. It can be enjoyed just for the sake of it.
Binary arithmetic doesn't make dollars for your bosses, but its fun. That doesn't make it less significant.
reply