enable the absolute worst of what humanity has to offer. can we call it a reality check? we think of humans as so great and important and unique for quite a while now while the world is spiraling downwards. maybe humans arent so great after all. like what is art? ppl vibe with slob music but birds cant vote. how does that make sense? if one can watch AI slob (and we all will with the constant improvements in ai) and like it, well maybe our taste of art is not any better than what a bird can do and like. i hope LLM will lead to a breakthrough in understanding what type of animal we really are.

I don't see Yarvin on here... this needs expansion.

This is good to know. I hadn't read the fine print, because I abandoned Telegram and never looked back. I hope its true and I agree, I also wouldn't think they'd do this and then renege into a possible lawsuit.

Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.

We have to do this ourselves in the government for every decommissioned server/appliance/end user device. We have to fill out paperwork for every single storage drive we destroy, and we can only destroy them using approved destruction tools (e.g. specific degaussers, drive shredders/crushers, etc). Appliances can be kind of a pain, though. It can be tricky sometimes finding all the writable memory in things like switches and routers. But, nothing is worse than storage arrays... destroying hundreds of drives is incredibly tedious.

Can you replace politicians I feel like that would actually be an improvement. Hell it'd probably be an improvement if the current system's replaced politicians. To be honest though I've never seen any evidence that AGI is inevitable, it's perpetually 6 months away except in 6 months it'll still be 6 months away.

I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.