35
when steal launched
what a funny and in this context ironic typo
admitted to sabotaging their company’s AI by entering proprietary info into public AI chatbots, using unapproved AI tools, or intentionally using low-quality AI output in their work without fixing it.
Are the first two really sabotaging AI initiatives? The output is still the same.
The first sounds like a security and data use issue to me. The second sounds like users may look for better tools because the provided tools are lacking - which is not sabotage. The third is the only one clearly indicating sabotage to me. (Reasonable malicious compliance under presumably bad requirements and pressure.)
They already have a foot in the door.
That was someone else. Different people in this comment chain.
From the README (emphasis mine):
⚠️ We are excited about the amount of interest Thunderbolt has been getting and want to clarify that it is still early and under active development. Currently, we are targeting enterprise customers that want to deploy it on-prem. We encourage you to self-host it and try it out, but there are a few caveats we are still working on:
Mozilla is so untrustworthy these days that they had to cite themselves in the testimonial
okay, that's kinda funny and ironic.
And it's their only testimonial on the website. From the screenshot I thought it'd be one of multiple.
Given it's a new product, not too surprising though, I guess. I wonder if they had any testing/cooperation partners.
Good presentation of what they seek and arguments - pointing out it's about preventing destruction, not potentially costly and imposing resurrection or continued support is a good move, not much opposing publishers can argue against that.
A lot of very supportive voices
What do you mean? They did. I linked repos. As for the AI training data, in the video they announce they'll open those too.
5
The title made it sound like a full lock-in. But one survived.
Harper grabbed a bar from his truck and handed it to another bystander, who managed to break the back window and pull the young woman to safety.
Tesla has faced criticism in the past for the design of its manual release levers, which are considered poorly designed and unintuitively placed.
Firefox plans to support Manifest V3 because Chrome is the world's most popular browser, and it wants extensions to be cross-browser compatible, but it has no plans to turn off support for Manifest V2.
If Google decided to break V2 compatibility with V3, Mozilla should announce V4 (or V3 extended), which is V3 but with the missing stuff readded.
That'd be a good practical and great product/tech marketing move. Just like most people won't see how V3 is worse than V2, V4 will indicate it's the evolved and improved V3.
It would also simplify supporting V3 and V4 at the same time for extension authors. A great practical gain for extension authors, not having to read and understand two manifest schemes and APIs.
view more: next ›
Kissaki
0 post score0 comment score
joined 2 years ago
Please add cross-references when you post the same post to two communities at the same time. That way, people can find the other comments and discussion.