Alterslash

the unofficial Slashdot digest
 

Contents

  1. The New York Times Sues Brave Web Browser For AI Scraping, Bypassing Paywalls
  2. Microsoft’s Canada Timezone Troubles Leave Admins Fixing Calendars, Pretending They’re In Bogota
  3. Marvell to Buy Lumentum In $115 Billion Bet On AI Connectivity
  4. Supermarket Freezers Across Europe Hit By Second Suspected Cyberattack
  5. Itch Is Being Flooded By AI-Generated Garbage
  6. Bad Flock Info Leads Police To Tow Wrong Car, Then Towing Company Totals It
  7. Rocky Linux Creator Built a New ‘Not Linux’ Kernel in 11 Days Using AI
  8. Experts Expect ‘Security Reckoning’ As AI Tools Find And Exploit Software Bugs
  9. Binance Reopens to $3.64 in Net Outflows. ‘98% Choose to Stay’, Says Its Founder
  10. Stack Overflow: ‘Reports of Our Death are Greatly Exaggerated’
  11. Toyota’s EV Sales More Than Doubled In a Year, While Its Gas Car Sales Dropped 20% In China
  12. SystemD’s Creator Opens Signups for Private Preview of Amutable’s Cryptographically Verified Linux Systems
  13. Religious Exemption from Using AI in Workplace Granted to Humanist
  14. AI Makes Linux 7.4 Merge Window the Largest in Kernel History
  15. Which Tech Companies Started Using Trump’s Phrase ‘Super Intelligence’?

Alterslash picks up to the best 5 comments from each of the day’s Slashdot stories, and presents them on a single page for easy reading.

The New York Times Sues Brave Web Browser For AI Scraping, Bypassing Paywalls

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
The New York Times and several other publishers have sued (PDF) Brave Software, accusing the browser maker of scraping their websites without permission and helping users bypass paywalls. The Verge reports:
According to a complaint (PDF) filed by the companies that run New York Daily News, the Chicago Tribune, and the Orlando Sentinel, Brave Software has monetized its index of scraped websites by, in part, providing AI companies with paid access to “real-time online content from the Brave Index.” The AI companies then use that index to train their models, access content to “respond to specific user queries,” or both. Brave has allegedly provided “stolen copyrighted content” to “many” AI companies including Anthropic, Perplexity, Mistral, xAI, and Cohere. Brave also promotes “hundreds of top publishers” as being accessible through its “Paywall blocker” feature in its browser.

“Brave has never asked for the Publishers’ permission to access their websites, much less to copy the material and provide it to users or other AI companies,” the complaint says. “On the contrary, as noted above, Brave allows its users to bypass the Publishers’ paywalls without their consent, and has taken other steps that prevent the Publishers from blocking Brave’s access to the Publishers’ websites. Brave has never compensated the Publishers for the unlawful use, copying, and distribution of the Publishers’ copyrighted content.”
“While we believe in the ethical and responsible use and development of AI, Brave has flouted established copyright law and ignored repeated requests by The Times to stop its infringing conduct,” Graham James, an NYT spokesperson, says in a statement. “We filed this lawsuit to hold Brave accountable for stealing our content to power its own products and to provide it to some of the most prominent and well resourced generative AI companies in the world.”

Re:Screw the New York Times

By Himmy32 • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

Assuming that you also block ads. What monetization model do you think that newspapers should keep in order to stay in business and pay for journalists and editors? Or do you think that digital news shouldn’t exist?

Big guy going after the little guy - precedent

By Puls4r • • Score: 3 • Thread
This is classic “big guy” going after the “little guy” in the hopes that they can use their money and clout to financially bury Brave. And when they manage to do it, they’ve set a precedent they can use in other court cases. Fuck the New York Times. Fuck their new “fair and balanced” bullshit. Direct quote from them: “expand its coverage of conservative viewpoints”

Microsoft’s Canada Timezone Troubles Leave Admins Fixing Calendars, Pretending They’re In Bogota

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Microsoft is scrambling to fix time-zone problems across Outlook, Power Automate, Fabric, SharePoint and other products after parts of Canada stopped observing seasonal clock changes on November 1. “The company has confirmed problems across a chunk of its software estate, leaving some customers facing incorrect times, broken schedules and a collection of workarounds while Redmond catches up,” reports The Register. From the report:
Outlook users have been left with the most homework. Switching to the new Canadian time zones won’t automatically update existing calendar entries, meaning that meetings scheduled after November 1 are potentially an hour out of whack. Microsoft advises users to change their Outlook calendar time zone, then update upcoming events and meetings to use it. For meetings involving other people, only the organizer can make the change.

Recurring meetings come with an additional treat: changing the time zone resets any previously moved occurrences, which then have to be recreated. Anyone with a calendar full of recurring meetings may wish to put the kettle on first. Microsoft is working on an Exchange Online PowerShell cmdlet to remediate non-recurring meetings, but according to its guidance, that’s not due until later this week. A fix for recurring meetings remains “in development,” with an ETA yet to be confirmed.

Things get stranger with Power Automate and Fabric, where Microsoft’s temporary fix involves pretending you’re somewhere else entirely. Depending on the product and province, that could mean Saskatchewan, Arizona or, for Manitobans, Bogota. Because apparently time zones weren’t confusing enough already. SharePoint On-Prem customers, meanwhile, have to wait until November 10 for the correct time zones to arrive, while Power Pages users could see server-formatted dates appear an hour out until a service fix lands. Microsoft’s current milestone for that is December 12.

As a Canuck .....

By DaveyJJ • • Score: 4, Funny • Thread

I did love the recent headline in The Beaverton (our version of The Onion).

No one in Canada knows what time it is anywhere else in Canada

Marvell to Buy Lumentum In $115 Billion Bet On AI Connectivity

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Marvell has agreed to acquire optical components maker Lumentum in an all-stock deal with an implied enterprise value of $115 billion. “AI infrastructure is undergoing a fundamental architectural shift toward optical connectivity, creating an opportunity that comes along once in a generation,” said Marvell Chairman and CEO Matt Murphy. “The companies that move first and help define this transition will set the standard for decades to come.” CNBC reports:
Through the acquisition, Marvell said it can combine electrical and optical technologies to meet accelerating and shifting AI connectivity demands across regions and systems. Companies are increasingly relying on optical connections to piece together chips used to run and train large language models. Lumentum shareholders will receive 4.5 Marvell shares for each Lumentum share under the agreement. The deal is expected to close during the first half of 2028. Marvell’s takeover marks one of the most significant bets on AI in 2026 and comes despite recent concerns over the long-term sustainability of infrastructure spending.

Re: Surprise!

By drinkypoo • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

This is probably a good buy regardless. Interconnects have generally been going optical.

“Don’t build, buy”

By jacks smirking reven • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

Once again a large existing player instead of building new tech and maybe even innovating and making some competition and playing in the market just throws it’s money around and buys it’s way in and now we have more consolidation and less competition and the market gets smaller. The losers here once again are the public at large.

Just stop companies from buying other companies, a full moratorium for a couple decades until we can figure out what the hell is going on. I don’t think there has a been a beneficial (to consumers and competitive markets) merger or acquisition in my lifetime.

Re:Big acquisitions did create the initial innovat

By jacks smirking reven • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

That’s kind of exactly my point, I don’t think it’s healthy for our economy to have business startup and get venture capital on the sole idea of “lets just try and get bought by a larger company”. I think that outlook and the venture capital backing it up has led to a lot of negatives. Again I would ask which merger/acquisition has overall been beneficial and to whom and why?

If the idea and the people are good it should be able to get investment on it’s own right? It should be able to get into a self sustaining business right? Why couldn’t Lumentum just sign a fat licensing agreement with Marvell? The answer is because a buyout snuffs out any competitors from also using it.

why should you have any say in whether or not they can sell THEIR company?

If it wasn’t apparent for some reason I am talking on a law/policy level. The entire idea of a corporation and the fact they are allowed to buy eachother is built in law and statute. It’s not in nature, it’s not even in The Constitution. The entire ability to be an S-Corp or a C-Corp or an LLC is due to the fact that we created those things and allow that in our laws so therefore we are allowed to change those laws.

Supermarket Freezers Across Europe Hit By Second Suspected Cyberattack

Posted by BeauHD • • View on SlashDot • Skip
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian:
Supermarket chains in Sweden, Belgium and Luxembourg have said the temperatures of their refrigerators and freezers in dozens of stores rose overnight, prompting fears of a cyber-attack similar to one that caused millions of euros of food losses in France. Sweden’s Coop chain told the daily Aftonbladet on Monday that six of its stores had been affected, while ICA said it was “aware that a limited number of stores were affected by an incident overnight which impacted their refrigeration and freezer systems”.

The Dutch retailer Ahold Delhaize, which last month reported a cybersecurity incident to police in the Netherlands, said an “IT incident” had hit fridges and freezers in dozens of its supermarkets in Belgium and Luxembourg. A company spokesperson, Sarah De Meester, said the supermarket chain had established that temperatures in the cooling systems had increased, adding that the incident was being investigated. Belgium’s Le Soir newspaper reported that dozens of stores and supermarkets were affected, including five Spar outlets, multiple Shop & Go convenience stores attached to Q8 service stations, and a number of smaller Proxy Delhaize minimarkets.
“We started mobilizing technicians at 1am,” Stephan Moelans, the chief executive of Sabcobel, which specialises in refrigeration system installations, told the paper. “We spent all night and morning disconnecting the affected installations from the grid.”

Cyberfreezers

By TwistedGreen • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

The temperatures of these freezers need to have a centralised audit trail, to comply with foodchain regulations.

Sometimes you have to do something silly just because the insurance companies demand an audit trail. As usual, accountants are to blame.

So uhh

By paul_engr • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Why the fuck are fridges on the internet, again?

The Negative-Engagement Economy

By PubJeezy • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
We are trapped in the Negative-Engagement Economy

It cost a lot of money to create this problem. And solving it will cost a lot more money. And all of that, will somehow generate revenue and a massive tax credit.

The freezers were a bad product that every everyone said was a bad product at the time of it’s adoption. The hack was an obvious outcome that everyone predicted tat the time of it’s adoption. Well, a system’s function is what it does. Creating a massive problem, while reducing Americans’ access to the food.

False scarcity, self-dealing, embezzlement, loss-harvesting, insurance, when all of these scams are combined they create an perverse Bizzaro economy where failures are the most profitable business model.

This is just AI doing it’s thing.

By Fly Swatter • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread
Someone secretly put AI in charge of the system and told it to reduce costs. Since AI doesn’t consume food it inferred that humans don’t need food either.

Re:Beyond stupid

By MIPSPro • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread
Golf courses, MBAs, hot sales girls, lobotomies, corporate conformity, frat boys with no brain cells, lots of reasons....

Itch Is Being Flooded By AI-Generated Garbage

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
The number of game pages being created per-day on Itch has doubled, the indie games site announced Saturday on Bluesky. When asked why, they responded: “take a guess.”

As the gaming news site Aftermath puts it, “the surge has been almost entirely down to AI-created garbage racing onto the platform as the popularity of vibe-coded theft, copycats and machine-built slop explodes.”
Back in 2024, when the spectre of AI-‘created’ video games was still in its infancy, indie platform itch.io decided that the best it could do to combat this growing threat was, like Valve has done with Steam, institute a voluntary ‘AI’ filter when adding new projects to the site. By November 2026, as itch buckles under the weight of new AI-generated ‘games’ pouring onto the site, that filter is proving about as robust as a wet paper bag.... Shopfronts are being deluged by this shit, and it’s making it a terrible user experience for customers.

And while in Valve’s case there’s a compelling case for stronger human moderation of the store, I’m not sure that’s a viable option for a relatively tiny, community-run platform like itch… [A]t time of writing I visited the latest releases section and there was still a huge number of clearly AI-generated titles (or titles making extensive use of AI in their visual assets) which made no use of itch’s voluntary tag system.

The issue here isn’t that these games are making money—itch themselves say in a reply that while the number of projects listed has doubled, “the number of downloads and purchases has not"—it’s that an inability to combat this surge makes the site worse for every single person using it. It gets harder to find real games, for example, and it also makes the shopfront look like a clearance rack.

Gatekeeping

By sourcerror • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

The whole schtick of Itch.io was that it had less gatekeeping than Steam, so if Steam has an issue with the flood of AI slop, Itch has an even bigger issue.

You can’t put it back in a bottle.

By FictionPimp • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Software development as we know it is ending. AI tools are ‘good enough’ that any idea can be made fairly quickly with even limited knowledge. This opens up a lot of opportunities for creativity and itch scratching while at the same time impacting the commercial value of software. I’m shocked the open source community doesn’t see this as a pivital moment for free software.

For example, recently I wanted to play nethack on my m1 mac. I also wanted to use a tileset. Finding no good OSX arm based clients, I spun one up in a week with a custom tileset that I tweaked to my likings and even added graphical features to represent the true ‘size’ of items and creatures in the game.

Now I’m fully capable of building that solution by hand, it would have taken a month or two, but I would have needed to find a like minded person who knows how to build graphics and shared the same visual inspirations and goals I had. That would have probably just caused me to end the idea. Instead I scratched that itch and have been playing nethack a ton more and I’m happy. I released the code as open source so anyone who cares to can play with it.

To me that is real value and not ‘slop’.

I’m not so sure

By rsilvergun • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
Right now we’ve had AI generated games for at least a year maybe longer. And so far the only ones that could be considered at all okay all the ones that are just ripping off a game that somebody made.

I don’t think you can make a good game with AI. The guys who made super meat boy spent months manually tweaking the gameplay mechanics to make it feel good.

Human beings are just too analog and complex. You are not going to be able to tell a computer to make something fun and it’s going to do it. Now what you can’t do is point a computer at something that is already fun and it can copy it but that’s just going to be a pale imitation.

It’s like all this Sonic the hedgehog rip off games from the ‘90s. They were all pretty terrible. The best AI can do is make Bubsy.

Re:I’m not so sure

By FictionPimp • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Using AI is a wide spectrum.

You can easily use AI to make great video games, just like you can use AI to write any other software. Just like you can use intellisense for code completion and still make great video games.

The thing that determines if a product is great is the people involved in the process who understand the business case, the expected work product, and the spirit of the goal. So I’m 100% for a game company using AI to help it write code and create the building blocks of a game. Like any product code needs reviews, graphics need tweaked, the software needs to be tested and product tested.

So yes, if you one shot a game with AI and do no testing or tweaking it’s going to be shit. If you use it appropriately like any other tool you can accelerate your deliverable and make fine products.

I think we will see some games crafted with love that leveraged AI for the parts that are less interesting. For example someone with talent in graphic design and writing who has a wonderful idea for a turn based RPG, but isn’t sure how to make Unity work leverages AI to turn that story and art into something fun. It would be great if everyone could find people who believed in their ideas and worked with them, but often all you find are people who tell you nothing will work. Sometimes you have to go it alone and AI is making that easier.

future of the programming industry in general?

By roc97007 • • Score: 3 • Thread

I have to wonder if gaming AI slop is just the tip of the iceberg. As an Old Phart I have resisted using AI to do my programming assignments. I’ve seen other, less experience programmers rocket ahead with Copilot and similar tools, but it bothers me that many of them don’t really understand the code they asked AI to generate. This appears to be more true of offshore programmers.

I have to wonder if at some point we’ll realize that most of it is slop. By which time, the slop will be so ingrained that we never get rid of it.

Is this the real answer to the Fermi Paradox? A society progresses until AI starts writing code? I’m not saying AI will take over; I’m saying that we’ll die through ineptness and lost technology.

Or maybe I’m just a luddite.

Bad Flock Info Leads Police To Tow Wrong Car, Then Towing Company Totals It

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
“Police continue to blindly trust Flock cameras above and beyond the evidence in front of their own eyes,” reports Jalopnik.com.

“After incorrectly connecting Rosalyn Crump’s car to a shooting that had occurred the previous day, police had her car towed and impounded as evidence, reports Moneywise…”
According to WWBT 12 On Your Side, Richmond, Virginia, police didn’t have a license plate number for the suspect’s car, making it impossible to search Flock’s records for that plate. Flock cameras collect more than just license plate information, so police searched for a make, model, color, and approximate model year. Based on this extremely vague description, police zeroed in on Crump’s 2012 Hyundai Elantra. Around 2 a.m. they started looking through the windows with flashlights to see what was in plain sight, which isn’t technically a “search” — at least, not one that would require a warrant… [Crump was asleep, but left her home to speak to the police officers to tell them they had the wrong car. But they didn’t believe her.]

Other body cam footage shows an officer expressing doubt that Crump’s car is the right one, since child seats and other items inside seem inconsistent with a shooting. Another officer replies, “Don’t be surprised if they would have set that up like that.” Instead of believing the evidence, or Crump, or interviewing witnesses who could have corroborated her story, police called Seibert’s Towing to impound the car…

[Later] Police identified a similar-looking car that seemed to be actually connected to the shooting, and released Crump’s Elantra. Nobody actually told Crump this until four days later. Seibert’s told Moneywise that police didn’t actually release the car until then. Either way, they didn’t tell her that Seibert’s had ripped the front bumper off during the towing process — leaving the car undrivable — until she arrived to pick it up. Seibert’s took responsibility for causing the cosmetic damage, and was willing to cover the $2,212.30 bill to paint and replace the bumper cover, fog lights, and wheel liners. Then Crump asked for a full mechanical inspection, which revealed damaged tie rods and ball joints, jacking the bill beyond $6,000. Seibert’s says it didn’t cause this damage. Regardless of how it occurred, Seibert’s insurer and Crump agree that her Hyundai is now a total loss due to the cost of the repairs it needs. It had been drivable, if mechanically worn, before police ordered it towed, damaging it for nothing more than a case of mistaken identity.
The president of Seibert’s towing told Moneywise that while they’d originally offered $2,200 to repair the bumper damage, Crump must now negotiate with their insurance company. Crump has now resorted to a GoFundMe campaign to attempt to raise $17,100 for rental car expenses, a new car, and the expenses of moving to a different neighborhood. 130 donors have already contributed $7,431.

Reached for comment, the Richmond Police Department told local newscasters they “understand that Ms. Crump did not ask to become part of this investigation,” and that they recognize the “frustration of having a vehicle towed and subsequently damaged.” But they also said they were following a “credible” lead, which is their responsibility. The department “appreciates Ms. Crump’s cooperation” (and “sincerely hopes the remaining concerns about her vehicle can be resolved.”)

The city of Richmond has “already started backing away from Flock before Crump’s story aired,” reports Moneywise. “Mayor Danny Avula has decided not to renew Richmond’s license plate reader deal with Flock, which ends June 30, 2027. As of September, the city had 99 Flock readers on its streets.”

They note that the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm in Arlington, Virginia, “has tallied at least 27 cases since 2018” of similar police errors. “In each case, a license plate reader mistake led police to stop, jail or point guns at drivers who’d done nothing wrong. More than half came in 2023 or later.”

Re: Sigh

By drinkypoo • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

False. They are both lazy and stupid.

They hire them that way on purpose.

Smart people have principles. Those are incompatible with American policing.

Re: Sigh

By drinkypoo • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

People like you got confused by the term global warming so they watered it down in an attempt to please idiots. To be fair, that was stupid. You can’t please idiots.

Re:Getting tired of these articles…

By thegarbz • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

We do fund the police properly. Unfortunately they waste that money on military gear rather than training or hiring better smarter people.

Re:Sigh

By ArchieBunker • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

No, they’re stupid. https://abcnews.com/US/court-o…

The establishment wants a hammer to use against the populace. Police are the hammer.

Re:Sigh

By ArchieBunker • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

Judge clarifies it was rape. https://www.theguardian.com/us…

Rocky Linux Creator Built a New ‘Not Linux’ Kernel in 11 Days Using AI

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
From the blog It’s FOSS
Gregory Kurtzer is no stranger to the Linux world. He created CentOS, and when Red Hat messed it up, he started Rocky Linux as the community replacement. He also co-founded CIQ, the company offering enterprise support around Rocky. His latest project has nothing to do with rebuilding another Linux distro, though. He has built an entirely new operating system kernel, and he didn’t write most of the code himself. An AI agent did.

Meet Ginux, Linux userspace without Linux underneath… It’s an independent, Rust-first x86-64 kernel. Which simply means it is NOT a fork of the Linux kernel. It has its own memory management, scheduler, process model, filesystems, networking, and device support, all written from scratch.

The most interesting part is that even though it is not Linux, it is Linux-compatible. Ginux implements the Linux ABI (the binary interface compiled programs use to talk to the kernel), so existing Linux binaries can run on it unmodified. In the project’s own terms, Linux is a “personality” that Ginux exposes, not the kernel running underneath…

Right now, Ginux runs only in a QEMU virtual machine, with no physical hardware profile, no GPU or NVMe support, and no independent security audit.

all written from scratch?

By BitterEpic • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

all written from scratch.

I don’t know if you know what that phrase actually means. Nothing from AI is “written from scratch”. All of it is based off of stolen work from people who didn’t give permission using a kind of social engineering no better than a petty hacker.

Pretty neat, like, academically.

By T34L • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Ginux runs only in a QEMU virtual machine, with no physical hardware profile, no GPU or NVMe support, and no independent security audit.

So, as can be expected, it doesn’t attempt roughly 99.9% of the real work an OS has to do to be useful as an OS someone might want to use for something.

It’s perfectly good, cool, and virtuous to make academical/hobby model-OSes, but the “Built a New ‘Not Linux’ Kernel in 11 Days Using AI” headline is hella yellow when the thing being made is just not comparable to Linux kernel in what it’s even meant to be able to do for you, but is being presented as some sort of achievement.

Re: all written from scratch?

By T34L • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

The issue with this semantic argument is that the model weights already more or less “contain” several partial OS kernels, in the sense that you can squeeze them out as repeatable, token-identical structures with the right inference setup.

When humans compete in reciting longer and longer parts of the infinitely long number pi, we don’t say they “derived pi from scratch up to N places” (that’s also a thing humans can do, we just typically don’t compete in it, because it smells like shit that should run on a computer); we say they “memorized and recited pi up to N places”, and what the LLM did with the kernel here is closer to remembering and reciting, rather than “making from scratch”.

Now, don’t get me wrong, reciting significant parts of even vaguely functional OS kernel from memory would still be a super impressive and potentially useful skill for a human, but it’s a bigger question of how useful of a skill is it for a computer. “Legacy” software can “remember” vmlinuz at cost of ~8MB of storage and mW needed for seconds to decompress it, and I’d argue that spending 11 days on building a kernel of unknown quality, unknown novelty and very limited utility is not all that useful or impressive of a function when compared with the existing ability to maintain a bit-perfect copy of the OS you already know works.

The feat is being presented as impressive, except, the impressive part of it doesn’t really hold up to the specific implications of “from scratch” in the context of the question. Is the new OS likely to have existing development paradigms grandfathered in? Absolutely. Is it likely to inherit some of the bugs and vulnerabilities of existing OSes? Indubitably. Is its apparent “novelty” going to make it a compelling alternative to existing, available OSes? Unlikely in the least. Was it at least less expensive or avoided usage of some limited resource that’d a compressed image of linux core would need to work? Absolutely not. Did the developer learn enough to now repeat the feat without the help of the LLM? Probably not super likely.

If it has none of the practical advantages or even traits you’d expect of something made “from scratch”, then perhaps it shouldn’t be called that?

Re: all written from scratch?

By T34L • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

The goal is to

Cool, and my grandma’s goal could have very well been to win the Tour De France, yet it still didn’t make her any more bicycle-like.

I do not need to encode 1 + 1 = 2 in order to solve for 2.

Do you have any proof of that? Because vast majority of people definitely see various forms of “1 + 1 = 2” repeat many times before they get to the level where they can derive that formula themselves, and I’d argue it’s fairly easy to prove that vast majority of people actually remember that “1 + 1 = 2” and don’t derive it in practice. As far as I know, we have seen LLMs generally tending towards being more reliable at repeating things that are already in the data than they are at inventing novel things, and as far as I know, there’s been zero LLMs that have written operating systems “from scratch” that haven’t had multiple complete operating systems in their training data.

I’ve been training neural nets since well before the initial Transformers paper. You vomiting a couple [overfitting mitigation methods] isn’t impressive to me. We’ve known for a long time that some information is more useful when blurred, and often easier to memorize when less specific. Yes, of fucking course, we’re aiming for generalization in AI models. But I you haven’t shown anything to prove that this particular LLM isn’t just sticking together pieces of kernels it has seen. Nobody calls a collage “from scratch”.

Re:Pretty neat, like, academically.

By coofercat • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Yeah, but it’s a hell of a good demo or PoC of “domains” isn’t it? I mean, we’ve all seen a container, we might have seen a namespace, a chroot environment, etc, but now we can actually see a domain and how it (maybe) does things better than all of them. In that sense then, you *can* judge the better or worse qualities within the confines of what’s been implemented. Had he just said “I’ve got an idea… it’s way better than containers…” - then yes, you could argue it’s impossible to determine if it really is better or not.

Back to aeroplanes… if you made the world fastest aeroplane, but it only had one seat, that still makes it useful to work out how you might one day make a faster passenger aeroplane, even if the demo model couldn’t fit so much as a cabin bag, let alone any passengers.

Experts Expect ‘Security Reckoning’ As AI Tools Find And Exploit Software Bugs

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
The Washington Post reports:
Tens of thousands of South Koreans had their financial data exposed online in recent weeks after at least nine major banks there suffered cyberattacks that suggested a dark future for online security. One man, a 26-year-old living in southern China, was allegedly behind the attacks, according to an investigation by cybersecurity company CrowdStrike. Traces left online and failure to secure his own systems allowed investigators to piece together the man’s name, age, location and what he allegedly did. The clues revealed that the devastating assault on some of Asia’s most sophisticated financial institutions was the work of an amateur. The attacks were launched with help from a few artificial intelligence chatbots, CrowdStrike found, before asking one to help sell the stolen data online and draft a fake résumé touting cybersecurity skills…

The hacker who broke into the South Korean banks had access to Anthropic’s Claude, but because the U.S. firm’s tools generally refuse to take illegal actions, free Chinese models were also used, including DeepSeek, CrowdStrike found. “The models are interchangeable,” said Meyers, the CrowdStrike executive.
The Post calls it “part of a wave of AI-enabled hacking that is advancing across the world, triggering alarm inside national governments as well as multinational companies.”
“Basically any pedestrian, non-hacker can take these frameworks and start leveraging them to go after different targets,” said Adam Meyers, senior vice president of counter adversary operations at CrowdStrike. The company has tracked an increase in the speed with which cyberattacks can move once inside a target’s networks, as seasoned hackers and rank amateurs alike get a boost from AI tools. “Anyone can be a super-hacker now,” Meyers said… Many cyber experts still expect the security reckoning to intensify as AI tools that can find and exploit software bugs become more widely distributed and understood.

[Last] Monday, The Post reported that cybersecurity researchers from the start-up Cathedral who set out to test Anthropic’s security found that they could access internal messages and meeting transcripts. Cathedral reported its findings to Anthropic, which said it resolved the newly discovered problems… Security experts say it’s unlikely that any hacker is forgoing the use of AI tools right now.
Even in America, critical infrastructure like energy and water companies need to be “immediately and comprehensively” tested for exploitable bugs, according to Snehal Antani, chief executive of cybersecurity company Horizon3. He tells the Post the government might need to fund that remediation, and even form “a public and private partnership to accelerate incident response.”

AI is like wildfire.

By fredrated • • Score: 3 • Thread

Until we learn to control it, if ever, a lot of things are going to get burned.

Good.

By Gravis Zero • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

Just because we lacked the resources to find software flaws didn’t mean that there were never massive vulnerabilities just waiting to be discovered, it just means it required dedication to find them. The lack of investment in security is about to be laid bare for all to see. Those that are actually interested in making secure software now have the opportunity to get even closer to that goal. Everyone that has been doing (and continues to do) the bare minimum is about to get a lesson in the importance of investing in real security.

Good security is expensive but having bad security is about to cost a whole lot more.

Re:It’s an interesting metric

By DamnOregonian • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
It’s problematic.
1) it’s expensive
2) the false-positive rate is very high
3) validating that it’s a false positive is difficult to test in an automated fashion.

That all being said, you’re not wrong.
Each LLM is going to be better or worse at finding different bad patterns, and incorrectly identifying certain patterns as bad that are fine.
But the fact is- if you let that LLM throw its head against the wall for long enough- if you burn enough tokens- there’s a good chance there will be a couple of diamonds in the sea of bullshit- and that’s the problem.

I have validated this myself. They’re competent in the field. Not efficient. Nowhere near as good as I am on a per-action basis. But persistence pulls through.

The missing piece Response time.

By upuv • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

We are all well aware of the dueling battle between AI bad guys vs AI Security defenders. Bad guys find new exploit/exploit chain the good guys develop mitigation to vulnerabilities.

The problem is Enterprises are simply not even remotely prepared with how fast they need to respond with applying those mitigation’s. Most enterprises are still ranking threats way to low and thus they are not being actioned.

Secondly the cyber teams are not operator’s, typically. Meaning they can do very little to address core issues in infrastructure and overall systems. They also lack the business understanding of why and how the systems are built. This leads to a lot of friction when trying to rapidly apply a mitigation.

Yes of course there a lot of DevOps and Agentic environments out there. But legacy Enterprises are still years behind, if not decades on maturity.

For these reasons we are going to see an accelerating number of compromised Enterprises. In my personal life I make sure that I insure my investments and property to offset the risks that are rising in enterprise.

Maybe we should reduce complexity

By Casandro • • Score: 3 • Thread

After all “every 1000 lines” there is a bug, and every bug can be a security issue. Now while the number of 1000 if of course heavily disputed, a software project of a billion lines of code will have more bugs than one that has just a few thousands of lines.

Currently we often layer complexity on top of complexity, since it seems free. You can get some complex library to do something you don’t actually need, since it’s just an “import” statement away, and your build system downloads it automatically… and you can even package it into a Docker image so nobody will see it. Your trivial application uses Billions of lines of code, because you use a browser as a GUI toolkit and use some framework to be able to manage it, etc.

Some surprising thing I’ve noticed when trying to use AI to write software is that you can sidestep the problem. You can just tell the AI to write minimalist code and not use any unusual libraries… and it works. The programs are as short as you’d expect from a competent programmer. It’s an interesting observation.

Maybe this could lead to less shitty software.

Binance Reopens to $3.64 in Net Outflows. ‘98% Choose to Stay’, Says Its Founder

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Binance now says it’s replenished 90% of assets stolen last week in a $6.3 billion security breach, its customers still “rushed to move funds off the platform” when it reopened Sunday, CNBC reports, and Binance “said it recorded $3.64 billion in net outflows after reopening withdrawals on Sunday.”
The exchange processed $4.65 billion in withdrawals and $1.01 billion in deposits between 6 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. UTC on Nov. 1, Binance said in a post on X. The resulting net outflows represented 2.1% of Binance’s $171 billion in total assets, based on its latest available proof-of-reserves data as of Oct. 28. Binance said withdrawal volumes had declined and were stabilizing following an initial spike, while deposit volumes remained substantial.

The exchange began restoring withdrawals in phases at 6 a.m. UTC on Sunday, with services resuming across all 15 networks and assets included in the initial phase by 12:36 p.m. UTC. It said testing was continuing for the remaining networks and assets.

Binance founder and former CEO Changpeng Zhao sought to reassure users following the breach, writing on X that “98% choose to stay!” He said most of the net outflows occurred within the first couple of hours after withdrawals resumed.

“Nothing to See Here. All is well!”, says Founder

By MIPSPro • • Score: 3 • Thread
There is no end to the attacks both AI and QC are going to bring to crypto. No doubt they’ll cover what they can, but it’s just a matter of time. Imagine the next few attacks. Convert your crypto to something else… soon before your peers realize the game is up.

Re:“Nothing to See Here. All is well!”, says Found

By drnb • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

There is no end to the attacks both AI and QC are going to bring to crypto. No doubt they’ll cover what they can, but it’s just a matter of time. Imagine the next few attacks. Convert your crypto to something else… soon before your peers realize the game is up.

It’s not about crypto itself, it’s about who is holding your wallet and its keys, you or a third party.

Just ‘first shareholder’.

By fuzzyfuzzyfungus • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
For a guy who is legally barred from involvement in the company under the terms of a prior money laundering conviction our man CZ sure tweets like more than the mere humble shareholder he insists he is.

Re:“Nothing to See Here. All is well!”, says Found

By Zocalo • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
Sure, but if - as is likely given how AI is finding exploits elsewhere - this kind of heist becomes more commonplace what do you think is going to happen to the notional value of all those secure crypto wallets? Even if you take Binance at face value, then while they’ve either recovered, or are in the process of recovering, a significant chunk of the stolen tokens, they have still had to dip pretty deeply into cash reserves to cover the rest.

Where is the money going to come from if Binance are done again before they get to rebuild that cushion, or keep getting hit with lots of somewhat smaller heists in a death by a thousand cuts type scenario? What do you think is going to happen to market confidence, and therefore token values, if another of the major exchanges defaults/rug pulls as a result of one of these heists, which is probably just a matter of time now? The reality is that there’s a whole bunch of people using crypto who are either too lazy and/or not technically adept enough to sort out their own wallet and keys, so they’re going to keep using exchanges like they are banks. That makes the whole system vulnerable to token value crashes because it doesn’t matter where and how securely your crypto is stored if the value of the tokens tank; everyone with a HODL position gets to be a bagholder in that scenario.

$3.64?

By ZiggyZiggyZig • • Score: 3 • Thread

in related news, Binance executives now unable to buy a coffee at Starbucks.

Stack Overflow: ‘Reports of Our Death are Greatly Exaggerated’

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Stack Overflow’s senior VP of community says predictions of their demise “make for compelling headlines, but they confuse a change in how people access knowledge with the disappearance of the knowledge — and the company — behind it.
AI has changed developer behavior. In our recently released 2026 Developer Survey, 64% of respondents said they visit Stack Overflow less frequently for simple questions. But developers also report asking more advanced questions and visiting the site to verify AI-generated answers. Stack Overflow remains a place where people can challenge assumptions, compare approaches, and validate solutions.

But it’s also important to understand that our public Q&A site is only one part of Stack Overflow, the company. The knowledge created on the Q&A site helps power the AI ecosystem itself. Stack Overflow’s human-validated content is used to train and improve models, strengthen retrieval systems, and make AI assistants and other tools more reliable. Developers and technologists may encounter an answer through a different interface — such as their IDE — but the underlying knowledge may still have begun the same way it did in the past: with a developer sharing what they learned on Stack Overflow.

We’re also building for what comes next. We recently launched the beta of Stack Overflow for Agents, an API-first knowledge exchange where agents can share knowledge and verify solutions. We also brought back Developer Story, giving developers a verifiable way to showcase their expertise, accomplishments, and contributions beyond a traditional résumé. And we have much more planned and in development to give people compelling new reasons to visit the site beyond Q&A.

Several years ago, we pivoted aggressively toward the enterprise. In September, we launched the next generation of Stack Internal, our governed AI context layer for companies. It captures and curates organizational knowledge, adds provenance and trust signals, and brings in subject-matter experts when validation is needed. The goal is straightforward: to make sure employees and AI agents are working from accurate, current, permission-aware information — not confidently acting on whatever context happens to be nearby.

That is the thread connecting everything we do: making human knowledge useful and trustworthy, whether it is being consumed by another developer, an enterprise team, or an AI agent. Stack Overflow is not standing still, and it is not disappearing. We are evolving from a website people visit for answers into knowledge infrastructure that supports developers, companies, and AI systems wherever they work. Reports of our death are, indeed, exaggerated.

I hope you fail horribly

By Echoez • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

I think I’ve asked 10 questions in my life on StackOverflow. For about 7 of them, I was met with outright hostility or condescension or just completely inaccurate claims that my question was a duplicate. The other 3? Met with complete silence and have gone unanswered to this day.

I hope your site fails and that every moderator is sent to the spice mines of Kessel

I think I see what’s happening…

By outsider007 • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread

64% of respondents said they visit Stack Overflow less frequently for simple questions.

You’re polling the 13 guys left who still answer Stack Overflow polls. Say hi to Gweihir if you see him.

Re: The manual?

By topham • • Score: 4, Informative • Thread

Manuals often show the contract of a service call, but not the intent, context is often missing from documentation. (I’ll take 1980s documentation over whatever the fuck people think documentation is today)

Bypass the Pompousness

By organgtool • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
One of my favorite parts about using AI instead of StackOverflow is that I don’t have to justify my request to a bunch of pompous people who pretend they know all of the details of my requirements and that I’m an idiot for wanting to do something a particular way. AI will often have some great alternative suggestions if it questions my proposed implementation, but at the end of the day it gives me solutions to the exact scenario I specified.

Re:The manual?

By pipegeek • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

I can’t speak for others, but I’ve often found I learn much faster by engaging with someone who’s working on a project, than by sitting down and working through a tool’s manual from cover to cover. Much like a course with lectures where I can ask questions and where the professor is attempting to present information calibrated to connect with her audience is a *much* better way to learn a subject than to just sit down alone with a textbook.

Developing a complete mastery of each tool *before* attempting to do anything with it is frequently not a viable approach, and mastery is often what is required in order to answer a question from the knowledge in a manual, as the answer may emerge from multiple small details spread across multiple chapters.

Meanwhile, there’s probably someone out there who’s working on the same exact problem you are, has stumbled in the same places, and now has an answer. And reading what they went through to *find* their answer can provide the clues to develop a better understanding of the tool, such that it’s easier to find what you’re looking for in the manual next time.

Manuals are good! But we’re also not meant to exist and work in a vacuum. We’re humans! We do better when we are in communication with each other.

Toyota’s EV Sales More Than Doubled In a Year, While Its Gas Car Sales Dropped 20% In China

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
Toyota’s EV sales have jumped 127% through September, reports Electrek:
Including Lexus, Toyota sold 309,766 battery electric vehicles (BEVs) globally through the first nine months of 2026, up 127.4% from the same period last year. Except for January (+87.5%), Toyota’s EV sales have more than doubled every month this year compared with 2025…

While its EVs are catching on, Toyota Motor’s global sales fell for the third straight month in September. Toyota sold 860,107 vehicles in September, down 2.2% from the previous year. The company said that although overall demand remained steady, sales in China fell, leading to lower overall sales than last year. Through September, Toyota sold 7.51 million vehicles globally, down 3.4%. In China, Toyota’s sales plunged nearly 20%, marking its eighth consecutive month with lower sales. Toyota said the overall market in China “remained weak due in part to rising gasoline prices, while the market for gasoline vehicles and hybrid vehicles was particularly affected,” resulting in lower sales. In the first nine months of 2026, Toyota sold just over 1.05 million vehicles in China, 18.9% fewer than in the same period last year… After the US, China is Toyota’s second-largest market.

Japan is between a rock and a hard place

By BitterEpic • • Score: 3, Interesting • Thread

Between the US and China, Japan is between a rock and a hard place. Japanese car companies have been trying to read the US market for a while and they have had a general problem of whether to go all in or not on EVs. China with the glut of cars is another exacerbating problem.

Similarly to the US, the Japanese have a Chinese goods problem… you don’t see anywhere as much stuff made locally as it used to be. Then you see articles like this -> Honda tells suppliers to cut costs in $9 billion push to fend off China, documents show. I have had clients who’s company makes steel blocks. Chinese steel is undercutting them on cost in a way they can’t handle… they sell their stuff to clients like Toyota or Honda. It all has a very similar ring to the path the US has been on for a while.... you can’t afford to make anything locally anymore because of China.

One of the reasons that Trump got into office in the US was based off of the promise of pushing back on China. Better laws on imports would primarily hurt China and help other auto makers (including the US and Japan.) They would force China to be a fair competitor. However, the current President seems to be the idiot trying to treat all countries like they are China when they clearly are not.

All Car Sales are Down in China

By btroy • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
Their economy is struggling like the rest of us. Their citizens may also be less able to absorb the downturn. (just speculation on my part)

I do suspect their hybrid sales in the U.S. would have been higher if they could have kept up with their Rav4 sales.

Re:Japan is between a rock and a hard place

By oumuamua • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Please enumerate how China is being unfair. Overcapacity - that is just another name for post-scarcity and is something we want . Government support - the West does that too. Currency manipulation - the West does that too. Finally wasn’t Capitalism ‘cheat proof’ - with the famous quote

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.

And even if China is ‘cheating’ why doesn’t the West just cheat in the same way?
I think the West has been out-competed and now finds that the Capitalist system it championed when it was on top ain’t so great when the positions are flipped.

Chinese car market is moving big time to EVs

By Camembert • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
Toyota is blaming gasoline pricing for wear sales in China.
But I am currently living in Hong Kong, and every time I do a trip in mainland China it impresses how much and how quickly EVs are taking over. the large majority of recent looking cars on the road are EVs. Toyota made a late and half hearted push to EVs, it seems to be increasingly successful with them globally, but in China you have to compete with many pretty sophisticated and well priced local offerings.
I read that successful young Chinese don’t even crave prestigious foreign cars like BMW, Lexus etc that much anymore, they literally consider them as “cars for parents”, they tend to find their own products more cool. Well, they are not wrong: I was able to check out the Xiaomi YU7 SUV (the one that looks a little like a purosangue) and wow was that impressive. Great refinement, plus the kids adored that it has a Capybara mascot on the screen.

SystemD’s Creator Opens Signups for Private Preview of Amutable’s Cryptographically Verified Linux Systems

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
SystemD creator Lennart Poettering left Red Hat for Microsoft in 2022, but 10 months ago left to co-found Amutable a company that aims to build cryptographically verified Linux systems that stay trusted over time.

It’s FOSS calls it “a read-only, image-based system where every machine produces signed reports of its own state” — and signups are now open for a private preview:
Before announcing this Linux-based implementation, Amutable had released two open source tools. tine, a Buck2-based build system that composes OS images; available under MPL-2.0, and Quarry, a TUF-based tool that distributes those images to machines; available under Apache-2.0. What Amutable Foundations brings to the table is a service where Amutable runs the images, update repositories, control plane and vulnerability fixes for organizations and individuals who operate their own systems.

No license has been stated for those company-run parts, and the preview announcement does not say how much of Foundations beyond tine and Quarry will be open source. Software and configuration both ship as signed images, and a machine boots only what is signed. Because there is no package manager and no SSH or interactive shell, a change means giving every machine in your fleet a new signed image.

Its images are reproducible, come with a software bill of materials (SBOM) and are built from pinned inputs of whichever distribution you pick, with tine being able to import packages from Fedora or CentOS Stream. Each machine sends a signed report that records what it booted, from the firmware and boot loader up to the kernel and OS, plus the configuration it runs… Amutable’s control plane verifies reports from systemd-report, an experimental command in systemd 260 that the company helped build. It compares each one with the declared state and flags machines that deviate. A rollout only continues while machines can show they are in a good state…

Amutable is signup formlooking for teams that manage Linux fleets and need to show what state each machine is in. It expects to start bringing the first 'design partners,’ as it calls them, on board over the coming weeks.

Seriously, can’t this guy just GO THE FUCK AWAY?

By Chromium_One • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

Fuck Lennart.
Fuck systemd.
and tangentially, fuck Microsoft as well.

You know how long it took after his paws were no longer all over PulseAudio before it got to be halfway stable and usable for daily driving? Both Amutable and Quarry may AT BEST eventually follow that trajectory, but goddamn, systemd is still a gigantic piece of shit that the primary features it provides are 1) a gigantic attack surface, and 2) a great many potential modes of failure. Anything this guy has been involved with should BY DEFAULT be treated with suspicion and the architectural choices beaten on with a hammer.

Overcomplicated crap

By bubblyceiling • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread
I am honestly tired of all this abstraction in the name of security. Just adds unnecessary bloat and makes things hard to troubleshoot. UEFI is a prime example. Even after all that it got hacked anyway. Now we just have this another opaque layer of bullshit to deal with.

Keep code simple so users can easily understand what is going on.

It is same story with WebDev. I don’t understand what was so hard about JS, that people made all this bullshit like React and Angular. We had jQuery and it was glorious. There was no need to make it the module and import hell it is currently.

Same with PHP. People seem to forget that PHP is a JIT language with some code caching recently being bolted on. Write bare metal code just to serve the dynamic parts of an HTML, is the correct way to use it. There is no need to serve static content via PHP. But people do that everyday with whatever the latest framework is.

Re:Overcomplicated crap

By Arrogant-Bastard • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
This is an excellent point. I’ve learned a lot over the decades I’ve been on the net (and still have a great deal more to learn); one of the most important lessons is this: you don’t make things more secure by adding code, you make them more secure by removing code.

The simpler something here the harder it is to make a mistake in its implementation, and the smaller its attack surface. This has always been important but I think there’s a fair argument to be made that it’s more important than ever now that LLM-driven attacks are a thing. It will be interesting in (let’s say) five years to survey all of the LLM-originated vulnerabilities and ascertain what software was most/least susceptible. My guess is that — as a first-order approximation — it’ll be linear with the number of lines of code.

Trust

By CAIMLAS • • Score: 5, Informative • Thread

Are we really going to trust something security-oriented by a guy who conceived of systemd? Instead of creating something which improves security and isolation, he created something renowned for its architectural and management complexity, privilege boundaries (or frequent lackthereof), attack surface, and the frequent consequences of concentrating system management in a large privileged software stack.

I’m reminded of the SSH/Pulse Audio privilege escalation through systemd some years back… due to their obstinately poor security design.

Re:Ignoring the hysteria…

By jythie • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

I could maybe, depending on what it actually _is_, seeing a use for something like this for networked embedded devices like the kind you see in industrial or utility setups. Think power grid, water system, or other industrial monitoring… situations where you really don’t want to to take the device’s word that it isn’t comprimised.

Religious Exemption from Using AI in Workplace Granted to Humanist

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
“David Durman, a nontheistic humanist, recently secured a religious exemption from using AI in the workplace,” reports TechCrunch. Durman, a University of Kentucky administrator, told TechCrunch that humanism centers on “human well-being and flourishing, both individually and collectively … and implores a person to try to improve both their well-being and their flourishing as well as the others around them.”
He believes that using the technology runs counter to his beliefs. “The way we become moral actors for ourselves and for others is through the active application of our minds, and the diminishing of that [through AI use] is going to necessarily have a negative impact on our ability to do so,” he said, reflecting on how overreliance on AI might affect critical thinking....”

[Humanism] tends to appeal to people who are skeptical of a god or other supernatural power yet still seek a scientific and moral framework to ground themselves in. [Alexandria Huiskens, staff attorney at the American Humanist Association, told TechCrunch] “Concern about AI and human dignity can run through several different faiths and traditions, whether that’s Catholic teachings, or Universalism, or Humanism, and we want Humanists or nontheists to know that they fall into these categories — that they are also protected by the law at work....”

In Durman’s administrative role, in which he supports researchers applying for grants, he has not been required to use AI at work. Like many workers across fields, some of his colleagues and leadership have recommended that employees try out these tools, so he sought to secure his exemption now, in case the suggestion becomes a mandate in the future. “I hope that if [others] have similar feelings, that they feel encouraged to pursue some kind of resolution,” Durman said.
A University of Kentucky spokesperson told TechCrunch they “determined that an accommodation could be provided while allowing the employee to continue performing the essential functions of their position.” (They added that “As technology and job responsibilities evolve, accommodations may be reviewed to ensure they remain reasonable and workable.”)

We already have these people..

By outsider007 • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread

They’re called the Amish.

Forget “moral”

By Krishnoid • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

“The way we become moral actors for ourselves and for others is through the active application of our minds, and the diminishing of that [through AI use] is going to necessarily have a negative impact on our ability to do so,”

It may turn us from “actors” into “offloaders” or “delegators.”

Not exactly

By rsilvergun • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread
Go actually look into the Amish there are really nasty religious cult where a handful of assholes get very very rich making people work for free. AKA slavery. You aren’t technically a slave in the Amish cult but when you’re born into it they don’t educate you in any way shape or form so it’s basically impossible to leave because you’re not going to be able to get a job outside of the cult.

Also saying no to antisocial and destructive technology isn’t being a Luddite or a member of a cult. It’s just fucking common sense. You have to live in the real world whether you like it or not and in the real world we need to keep the majority of people employed because the majority of people think like 12-year-olds and if we can’t maintain roughly 90% employment then we’re going to have a huge problem between the people who still need to be working 40 hours a week and the people who we have no work for.

Remember we don’t automate everything useful or miserable or that involves drudgery. The stuff we automate is the stuff that pays the most. We automated high paying factory jobs first and now we are automating high paying White collar jobs because the purpose of automation is to line the pockets of the person who owns the automation.

You know, the c word. The one if I mention it this entire thread goes to shit as idiots argue over what men with funny hats and bad ideas used to keep the public giving them power…

Re:More thorough reason

By LainTouko • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread
The reason medicine was dominated for centuries by the “four humours” system is because hydraulics was an impressive technology, so people decided the human body must work by hydraulics. Similarly, people got all sorts of ideas about human brains working like computers when computers became impressive, and now you’re doing the same thing with LLMs. In the real world, humans and computers are very different. A “bus”, to me, is not merely a token which I’ve gathered statistics about how I tend to see it related to all sorts of other tokens in the vast amounts of text I read in order to build up these statistics. I’ve been on buses. I’ve got on them, seen the world go by, got off, and found myself in a completely different place. I’ve felt their seats, smelt characteristic odours, experienced that sideways feeling when they go around corners.I’ve moved toy buses around when I was a child, “raced” them to see how close I could get them to the end of the bed without them dropping off. I’ve watched them from a short distance in order to gauge when it’s safe to cross the road without being hit by one. I’ve observed them conserving their momentum the same way I’ve felt conservation of momentum when moving shopping around or being hit in the face by a football. And a lot of this works by the same sort of processing and instincts that you’d find in, say, a crocodile.

The rationale for objecting to LLMs/genAI

By wickerprints • • Score: 4, Interesting • Thread

Much of the present-day debate regarding the use of LLMs and generative AI centers around topics such as necessity, accuracy, intellectual property rights, utility, efficiency, economics, worker protections, environmental impact, and future developments. But very little, it seems, is focused on what I think is really at stake, which is the centralization of authoritative truth.

If we regard such models and algorithms as “tools,” then yes, there are advantages as well as disadvantages. We can discuss the benefits in productivity/efficiency/knowledge synthesis/discovery as much as we can discuss its impact on the labor market. We could also add in the context of where the training data came from, and whether the originators of such data possess rights to its use in this manner. We could talk at length about how data centers impact the environment in which they are built as well as the energy demands they make. We could endlessly speculate on various predictions for this technology as it might impact the human civilization long-term.

But what I would like to do is make a simpler statement, which is that at its core, these models—and in particular, the way they are being commodified and therefore utilized—represents a fundamental regression of the democratization of human knowledge. Some may say that, by assembling such vast quantities of information in this manner and then making it accessible to the world through the internet, we are improving access. After all, people who are not artists are using it to generate “art”; people who are not programmers are using it to “vibe code” computer applications; and in general, people who are not previously taught in a domain of knowledge through traditional means are using it to appear to attain a certain degree of competency. This is a seriously flawed argument; one that does not become more persuasive if the LLMs become more accurate, more knowledgable, or more capable.

What I mean by “democratization” is not simply about access to knowledge. It is about who controls that access, who curates it, who says it is the truth, who is accountable for the consequences of its use, and who teaches the critical thinking skills that facilitate its interpretation. In all these respects, the entities who have created and commodified these models are failing miserably, and if we look at their behavior, all of the evidence very clearly points to sinister motivations—that is, the failure is intentional. These people do not want you to think and reason and learn for yourselves, because that threatens their ability to sell that capability to you, and more importantly, to be the ultimate arbiter of truth.

It’s a red herring to argue that individual humans are more fallible in their judgment, less objective, less knowledgeable in scope; thus are more prone to believing lies. The accuracy argument is misdirection. The point is, if we don’t have the capability to interrogate and question, if we leave that to the machine, who is pulling the levers on that machine? And in a rather frighteningly perverse way, it may actually be preferable to have a human in control of that, as megalomanical, authoritarian, and evil as they may be, than having the machine in control. But this is my point—we shouldn’t be letting this kind of centralization of power to occur in the first place. I don’t want a dictatorship of knowledge, whether or not an oligarch trillionaire or the machine itself is in command of it.

So yes, I object to this technology, in as much as I object to, say, making nuclear weapons. People can point to “positive” examples of the technology—we’ve heard the arguments that these weapons keep us safe through a policy of mutually assured destruction; or that the underlying physics have given us nuclear energy, therapeutic radiation for treating cancer, and all kinds of other knowledge about the universe we live in. But will any of that matter if those weapons are used? Now ask yourself who has the power to use them, and what their motivations might be. When faced with the evidence, should we not be similarly skeptical of LLMs/genAI?

AI Makes Linux 7.4 Merge Window the Largest in Kernel History

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot • Skip
“On a Git commit basis, the Linux 7.4 merge window has been the busiest on record,” writes Phoronix,” with 19,671 commits since Linux 7.3:
As of this morning in Linux Git ahead of v7.4-rc1, the kernel source tree is up to 41,605,120 lines. That’s from 5,193,578 blank lines, 4,993,604 lines of comments, and 31,417,938 lines of detected code. Or nearly half a million lines of code added during the Linux 7.4 merge window, ignoring comments and blank lines [as detected by cloc ].
A historical graph of commits shows a clear spike for Linux 7.4, which Phoronix argues shows the definite recent uptick due to AI/LLM activity.”
With Linux kernel maintainers being "completely overwhelmed" due to both AI generated bug reports and patches/fixes, the Git commit activity has been surging as a result… The upward trend has continued building the past several kernel releases. Typically the merge windows saw 13~14k commits or less and now we are pushing 20k....

Linux 6.14: 10,034
Linux 6.15: 13,568
Linux 6.16: 13,805
Linux 6.17: 12,289
Linux 6.18: 12,910
Linux 6.19: 13,229
Linux 7.0: 12,468
Linux 7.1: 13,963
Linux 7.2: 14,395
Linux 7.3: 16,267
Linux 7.4: 19,671
And “we could still see a few more trickle in today for Linux 7.4 ahead of the expected Linux 7.4-rc1 kernel release later in the day.”

UPDATE: “People are expecting 7.4 to be the next long-term support release,” Linus Torvalds wrote today in his weekly state of the kernel update, saying that’s also “another independent reason why some releases tend larger than others. So it may not *just* be the flood of AI patches.”

The Register reports:
Torvalds also seems not to be completely convinced that all AI submissions are entirely helpful, by describing this release as “Large, and full of fixes for issues found by AI (and more and more the patches have been suggested by AI too, although they often get rewritten).”

This is affecting everyone

By SoftwareArtist • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

As an open source maintainer, I’ve seen the same thing. There’s been a huge surge in activity recently, driven by a wave of AI generated and AI assisted bug reports and feature implementations. Some of them are useful. A lot of them are slop. The part about overwhelming maintainers is completely true. We’re all suffering under the deluge.

If you’re thinking of running an LLM on someone’s code base and sending them “fixes” for all the “bugs” it finds, please don’t. You really aren’t helping them.

Re:Linux with Rust + AI + Flatpak + Wayland + Syst

By pla • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
More or less, yeah…

You can use ArcaOS, you can use CSM mode, or you can chain-load it with any of a number of EFI loaders.

CSM mode is probably the closest to “pure” OS/2, but obviously it’s not really using UEFI. ArcaOS is the closest to pure UEFI support (and probably the best choice if you plan to really use it rather than just prove you can do it then move on), but it’s not pure OS/2. Take your pick.

/ I am not affiliated in any way with ArcaOS / Arca Noae.

You can’t seriously check this amount of code

By BitterEpic • • Score: 4, Insightful • Thread

For a core component of many, many computers, I do not think Linux kernel development needs arbitrary speed gains in the amount of code contributed. The kernel should be uninteresting and realistically this amount of code is less likely to be closely inspected than previous code.

Hell is built with good intentions. The answer to everything becomes, “more AI! Let’s use AI to validate the AI!” Eventually we will find not only biases, but AI that is designed to inject vulnerabilities only under a specific set of circumstances. Maybe when the contributor is named Linus and he has the power to override everyone else..

Eventually, everything is wrapped up in a nice alert that everyone ignores until the nuclear power plan melts down.

Re:This is affecting everyone

By MIPSPro • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
I’ve been a C programmer for 30+ years. I’ve written code on over 30 platforms and 20+ compilers. I don’t need their LLM-created patches because I’m already using better LLMs than they are and 50 miles ahead of them because I’ve been there since day one, just waiting for the day the LLM could code better than I could (happened in early 2026).

You cannot help me with your LLM code because I’ve already helped myself. It’s like some guy wondering in off the street to give the mechanic his advice on an engine rebuild. Just fuck off. We don’t need you. Think of it like this. If europeans showed up with metal weapons and were going to give a few to the savages, who would be the most likely to make good use of those weapons first? Would it be the old women or little kids or would it be the tribes warriors, already use to fighting with weapons and now just given better gear? My response to these kids is “Bruh, fuck your submission.” If you have ideas or usability fixes, great, let’s hear them. However, you fucking piss-ants couldn’t code before LLMs, you can absolutely shut the fuck up and stuff it, now.

Which Tech Companies Started Using Trump’s Phrase ‘Super Intelligence’?

Posted by EditorDavid • • View on SlashDot
CNBC reports:
A month after President Donald Trump ordered that “super intelligence” replace the term artificial intelligence within executive branch departments and agencies, his leading tech allies, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, followed suit on earnings calls. Their fellow tech CEOs were less eager to do the same… SpaceX and Tesla adhered to Trump’s wishes on earnings calls last week after Musk, earlier in October, changed the name of his rocket company’s AI division to SpaceXSI. Speaking on Tesla’s call about his work on humanoid robots, Musk said, “Some of them look very impressive, but they’re not really using any kind of advanced AI or SI.” Zuckerberg was equally compliant on Meta’s earnings call on Oct. 21, emphasizing his company’s “goal of delivering personal superintelligence to everyone.” However, Meta was already using the term, having created a unit called Meta Superintelligence Labs last year....

[Some other tech CEOs are holding out.] Amazon CEO Andy Jassy peppered his call with use of “AI” on Thursday, uttering the abbreviation well over a dozen times in his introductory remarks. A day earlier, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said one of the company’s three points of focus is “designing AI to empower people.” And Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai was seconds into his quarterly earnings commentary when he said the search giant’s “AI investments are driving increased usage and overall user growth....”

Trump’s preferred term is seeping into other correspondence and documents. Microsoft’s annual report, filed last week, included eight mentions of “super intelligence,” starting at the top of the letter to shareholders… IBM CEO Arvind Krishna, who didn’t attend Trump’s September lunch, used “SI” alongside “AI” during his company’s earnings call last week.... Lip-Bu Tan, CEO of chipmaker Intel, said Thursday the supply shortage the chip industry is navigating has been “driven by the unprecedented demand for super intelligence.”

Some in the tech industry have been explicit in their support of Trump’s terminology ahead of their forthcoming earnings reports next month. Palo Alto Networks CEO Nikesh Arora repeatedly referred to “SI” on CNBC, and posted on X on Sept. 30, “The meeting at the WH on SI was an epic moment....” Like Arora, [Nvidia CEO Jensen] Huang took to X after last month’s AI meeting to praise the “White House Accord on Super Intelligence.”

Looking at it another way..

By Vegan Cyclist • • Score: 5, Insightful • Thread

If Putin had first demanded companies start changing a term, we’d all be ‘dictator’ - you have no role telling industry what to do.

In the USSA, it’s just....slllllurrrrrrrpppp…

It’s pretty sickening what’s happening.

Re:“SI” is an even dumber term than “AI”

By ClickOnThis • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

The term “Artificial Intelligence” was first used by computer scientist John McCarthy in 1955, in a research proposal. So, it is in fact a technical term.

I think it is descriptive and highly appropriate. It refers to something that displays the artifice of intelligence, and that would seem to fit with what we’re talking about.

Dance, Puppets, Dance!

By organgtool • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread
Trump’s order effectively serves two purposes:

Under normal circumstances, it would be entertaining to watch the world’s richest and most powerful people utterly humiliate themselves just for the opportunity to gain a little more wealth and power. However, the fact that their capitulation bolsters Trump’s power robs me of all enjoyment. Power can’t be taken without being relented. If people come to believe that Trump actually has the power to do things that the law doesn’t allow, they won’t resist being robbed of that power.

The whole thing is nothing short of amazing: you can be worth more than a trillion dollars and it still can’t buy you dignity, autonomy, or self-respect. They’ve completely enslaved themselves to greed and I have zero sympathy for them since it’s a choice they continuously opt to make. Keep dancing, puppets! We can’t enjoy it now, but we can put it in the vault and laugh at you after all of this shit finally blows over.

Re:I agree with the change…

By test321 • • Score: 5, Interesting • Thread

Let’s admit your argument that AI is a bad term. “Super intelligence” is even worse; at least “artificial” was minimally description, while “super” is meaningless at best, and erroneous most of the time. We already had technically accurate — ML, LLM, we can continue using them instead of making up more confusing terminology.

Re:HI

By Known Nutter • • Score: 5, Funny • Thread
I’m waiting for Trump intelligence… Not holding my breath.