Gimp is really just a rare/archaic ableist slur anyway - like to refer to someone with a limp or otherwise a leg/lack of a leg that impedes their gait. I’ve never heard it used in my life.

I’ve only heard it used that way once in my life. When I was in high school (about 20 years ago), I hurt my leg while playing basketball and was on crutches for a few weeks. This one kid in one of my classes constantly referred to me as “gimp” throughout my recovery.

Perhaps I misunderstood the author’s intent. Though even if their position is that the red team and blue team will be on a more even playing field when both have access to AI tools, I’m not sure I can agree with that assessment. The asymmetrical nature of offense and defense isn’t fundamentally changed by the advent of AI tools. While the current slate of AI tools may be uniquely more useful for finding and patching bugs, I can’t imagine a future in which AI tools aren’t also being tailored for exploiting and penetrating. The red team isn’t just going to sit around and not adapt the available toolset to favor their use cases as well.

Much like the arms race between anti-virus development and virus development, there will be defensive AI development and offensive AI development. Similar to what we’ve already seen with the arms race between LLMs and software that can detect if something was written by an LLM.

This fluff piece has quite the pie-in-the-sky attitude toward the blue-teaming applications of AI.

Some commentators predict that future AI models will unearth entirely new forms of vulnerabilities that defy our current comprehension, but we don’t think so.

How reassuring.

The defects are finite, and we are entering a world where we can finally find them all.

Could’ve said the same thing when enterprise anti-malware came onto the scene decades ago, but the reality was it was just another vector for the arms race between the red team and the blue team. The author seems to put a lot of stock in the whole “the blue team has access to these AI tools that the red team doesn’t currently have access to” argument, which kinda ignores the fact that that reality is simply not going to last.

I could be wrong, but any article suggesting “zero-days are numbered” doesn’t pass the smell test.

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

🤦‍♂️

Watching Dragon Ball reruns is legitimately hard for me some days since Toriyama’s passing. His death hit me harder than any other I can recall. The global outpouring of grief and camaraderie was a sight to behold. It was comforting to know so many other people loved him and his work and were mourning together.

I remember I was driving when the news about MJ’s sudden death broke over the radio. I was on my way to grab some lunch before meeting up with some friends to see a movie. I think we were gonna see the “Transformers” sequel.

I pulled into a fast food joint and they had the news on TV. I felt bad cause Farah Fawcett died the same day but her death was entirely relegated to the little news ticker at the bottom of the screen.

To some readers, even choosing Outlook as a part of a spacecraft’s communications portfolio would seem to be an anomaly. However, it is a standard part of the “Commercial Off-The-Shelf” (COTS) software astronauts use for their day-to-day operations.

To be clear, the spacecraft and primary flight systems will run on specialized radiation-hardened hardware and rigorously maintained software. COTS just complements this with a friendly layer, like Windows and Outlook, so astronauts can check schedules, indulge in personal communications, and so on, in a familiar way.

Kinda wild that we have such an abundance of processing power and memory that even space missions can load up with bloated software for the sake of “friendly” user interfaces.

As someone who has used Outlook a lot in an enterprise environment, I would not have believed that literal NASA astronauts use it for even the smallest task. Not because it can’t accomplish the task, but because of how slow, buggy, and unreliable it tends to be, even when properly managed by a capable IT team. They have been in space less than a day and they’re already wasting time and energy troubleshooting

deleted by creator

The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

I figured you were just being funny, but I’m feeling talkative today, lol

People always say this on stories about “obvious” findings, but it’s important to have verifiable studies to cite in arguments for policy, law, etc. It’s kinda sad that it’s needed, but formal investigations are a big step up from just saying, “I’m pretty sure this technology is bullshit.”

I don’t need a formal study to tell me that drinking 12 cans of soda a day is bad for my health. But a study that’s been replicated by multiple independent groups makes it way easier to argue to a committee.

I had this same error a few months ago when a drive was failing to mount because (unbeknownst to me) it was overheating. I turned the system off for a few hours before troubleshooting (I had errands to run). When I came back, the system booted without issue.

If you’re looking for an easy troubleshooting step, have you tried turning off the system for several minutes (and unplugging it) and then powering it back on?

😅😅🤡

Professional boxing is corrupt in many, many ways. I never said otherwise.

That said, boxing being corrupt isn’t the reason that Tyson lost to Paul. Tyson lost to Paul because Tyson was 58 years old. Again, not rocket science. This was an exhibition. The corruption you speak of is more prevalent in the actual professional circuit, not fights between youtubers and influencers.

And perhaps take your own advice about not “contaminating other people’s thoughts” with your unsubstantiated nonsense. Tyson took the fight because the purse was enormous even if he lost, just like everyone who agrees to fight Paul. No one who actually watches boxing was surprised when Paul won.

And yet you refuted no part of my argument and did nothing to lend credence to your own 🤔

The ignorant party here is you. But by all means continue laboring under the delusion that you understand boxing because you watched the highlights of one YouTuber fighting a geriatric in an exhibition.

Tyson barely threw a punch because he’s ancient and knew Paul could counterpunch much faster than Tyson could react. Tyson knew he was fighting an uphill battle and chose to be very conservative with his approach. Which was a smart idea. He didn’t want to get knocked out like Tyron Woodley did.

Do you actually follow combat sports at all, or do you only show up when a YouTuber is on the fight card? If the latter, I could understand why you might think the way you do. If you actually follow combat sports or have any understanding of how they work, it’s obvious that the fight didn’t need to be fixed. There’s a reason 58-year-old boxers don’t fight 27-year-old boxers. It’s boring and one-sided.

Again, “I do not like Jake Paul” is not actual evidence that the fight was fixed. Please feel free to provide any actual evidence you might have supporting your position, though.

You might’ve seen one too many movies if you think Tyson was going to win that fight. Vegas odds were Paul +249 to Tyson -190.

“I do not like Jake Paul and therefore Jake Paul could not have won the fight legitimately” isn’t evidence that the fight was fixed. Paul was fighting a man 31 years his senior and several inches shorter. It’s not rocket science. Everyone (including me) wanted Tyson to knock Paul out, but this isn’t Hollywood.

In what way? You mean the way Paul didn’t completely massacre him in round 1 even though he could’ve? That’s how exhibitions work. Paul was showing restraint because they wanted to put on a show. Tyson had zero chance of winning that fight so Paul carried him for a few rounds. That isn’t a “fixed” fight. “Fixed” means the outcome was agreed upon before the fight, but that isn’t what happened.

trying to prove that he setup, paid and that the fights were mostly scripted

There’s nothing scripted about the fights. He just only fights people he knows he can handily beat because of his size and youth. I don’t like Paul, but the whole “the fights are fixed” narrative is silly (and entirely devoid of evidence). He’s a hack who only fights people who are ancient, retired, or not even fighters to begin with like basketball player Nate Robinson. He doesn’t have to fix these fights; they’re just that overwhelmingly booked in his favor.

Also, this entire topic gives him exactly what he wants: attention for his rage-baiting clout-chasing career.

It’s impressive, just not particularly useful,

I will have to disagree with this. I have found LLMs to be remarkably useful in a variety of circumstances because they are pretty good at regurgitating API documentation and man pages in a relatively small context (effectively making them a very efficient google search).

For example, last week I accidentally deleted a partition from a USB drive. I asked an LLM how I might recover my data using GNU/Linux tools and it pointed me in the direction of ddrescue (and subsequently, gddrescue) and showed me how I could use the recovered disk image to recover my lost files.

I was already aware of ‘dd’ as a tool for disk management, but was wholly ignorant of ddrescue or gddrescue because I haven’t had a data recovery use case in over 15 years. It was a fairly simple affair, and it was much easier than asking StackOverflow.