Sorry, it looks like voice to text messed up my reply. I have fixed it.

You’d probably win a suit for the termination suit

Thank you but I’m trying to quit.

Some people won’t have admin control rights to do that. And by uninstalling it you are in violation of an executive order.

So like the phones of his secret service detail? I’m waiting for it to be announced that it’ll be bundled into the Trump phone.

That app just became a national security threat. It gives out information to a non-government server. It can be exploited by foreign agents.

Just a reminder to the president, this would include his own secret service detail and their location.

Instructions unclear. GPU stuck in cooling valve.

I’m just here for goblin content.

Youtube sourcing is the worst. I look forward to a text version

Seems like there should be a third exception. For those occasions where the article is about LLM generated text. They should be able to quote it when it’s appropriate for an article.

When I started at one company I put together a text file with all the different sources of info I found in training. By the end of training I had turned it into an HTML file. Years later we got bought out. Support from corporate disappeared on legacy customs who hadn’t moved over to new stuff.

A coworker tapped me on the shoulder “If I were to make a local network web server on one of these computers could I upload your help system to it for everyone to use?”

Next thing you know I’m the default source for all information on every system that has ever existed. Prior to that everyone knew that I had it all in my brain but only a handful of people knew that I also had it all in HTML.

TL;DR I built a pirate help desk knowledge base.

Can you state my position to me in terms I would agree with?

What is going on here? Something isn’t right about this conversation. We should not be this confused and talking past each other.

True or false: there has been no release by an AI company or anyone using AI to unmask the individuals obscured in the Epstein files.

I set up two different, not necessarily exclusive, options. Either it can’t do what they say or it can. If it can’t then that’s one issue. If it can then the people with something to prove aren’t stepping up to show us its potential. There could be multiple motivations behind that. But as it stands right now we just know that it’s not being used to do what they claim.

Did you see the “or” in my first statement?

My statement was that AI can be used unmask the individuals that have been redacted. AKA they are anonymized. This paper is all about de-anonomyzing.

I’m unclear on if we’re having a good faith conversation because I thought that would have been very clear from the beginning.

My statement that I’m quoting predates this paper. My statement exists completely independent of this paper ever being produced. My statement is not about this paper. My statement is about the state of AI and the industry. This paper reinforces my statement.

Seriously, I’m not qualified. No amount of appendix prompts and Dunning Kruger is going to change that.

I’m not demanding anything. I’m suggesting that AI can’t do what is claimed or that people with something to prove are not interested in proving something.

I’m not qualified to design the prompts and home users can’t really pile in 3 million+ documents.

That would be fun.