Skip to content

BREAKING: X CEO Linda Yaccarino Steps Down One Day After Elon Musk’s Grok AI Bot Went Full Hitler

Technology
181 135 0
  • 10 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    lordgarmadon@lemmy.worldL
    All hail our tiny head terminator overlords.
  • Comment utiliser ChatGPT : le guide complet - BDM

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 325 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    150 Aufrufe
    P
    Jimmy Carter gave up his tiny peanut farm. Yet people nowadays are just incapable of understanding the concept of conflict of interest?
  • 257 Stimmen
    67 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    L
    Maybe you're right: is there verification? Neither content policy (youtube or tiktok) clearly lays out rules on those words. I only find unverified claims: some write it started at YouTube, others claim TikTok. They claim YouTube demonetizes & TikTok shadowbans. They generally agree content restrictions by these platforms led to the propagation of circumspect shit like unalive & SA. TikTok policy outlines their moderation methods, which include removal and ineligibility to the for you feed. Given their policy on self-harm & automated removal of potential violations, their policy is to effectively & recklessly censor such language. Generally, censorship is suppression of expression. Censorship doesn't exclusively mean content removal, though they're doing that, too. (Digression: revisionism & whitewashing are forms of censorship.) Regardless of how they censor or induce self-censorship, they're chilling inoffensive language pointlessly. While as private entities they are free to moderate as they please, it's unnecessary & the effect is an obnoxious affront on self-expression that's contorting language for the sake of avoiding idiotic restrictions.
  • 88 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    83 Aufrufe
    J
    The self hosted model has hard coded censored content.
  • 77 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    U
    I don't see Yarvin on here... this needs expansion.
  • 3 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    29 Aufrufe
    M
    Are most people in "the west" worse off today than they were 150 years ago? Are there fewer well functioning democracies than there were then? Has no minority group seen any improvement in their freedom? Has there been no improvement in how people interact with each other? No improvement in poverty?
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    37 Aufrufe
    L
    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.