all 42 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 164 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I can just shake my head and say that humanity won't make it. We are so obsessed with stealing things from others but making sure our offer is not stolen it's insane.

Instead of really working together, which we are in dire need of currently.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 66 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Not all of us. Just a few actually. But not playing fair will always give them an advantage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Their advantage is a critical mass of people who aren't willing to sacrifice their comfort by rocking the boat.

    The people have always had the ability to rise up and form a better system. They just don't, unless there's literally no other option.

    And when the people do rise up, the psychopaths just go into hiding until they can worm their way back to the top again. They're a cancer, and likely our Great Filter

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -16 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Is this comment AI or just regular run of the mill Lemmy doomerism?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    A brief glance at the entire history of humanity would indicate that what they are saying is true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    In case you're really interested I am alive and well and able to think myself. It's neither and if you don't agree that's absolutely fine by me.

    It's one of the things I'd live to be proven wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    It’s always funny to see comments like this, dismissing AI critics by calling them “doomers”, while society as a whole is still dealing with the consequences of the last widespread tech fad: social networks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    social networks are over 20 years old, think you need to look up the term fad :p

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Sorry about that. Let’s call it “another technology specifically designed by large corporations to be extractive and destructive”.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    well I mean AI helps me every day at my job, there are jobs I would have turned down before that would have taken thousands of hours but thanks to AI I only spent 10's of hours on them

    I also use AI 5-10 times per day for personal reasons

    Social media on the other hand is a plague of garbage and I wish facebook and twitter would be deleted off the net

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    there are jobs I would have turned down before that would have taken thousands of hours but thanks to AI I only spent 10's of hours on them

    Weird take. You would have turned down a job because it takes “too long”? The whole point of wages is to get money for your time.

    Also, highly doubt something that would take you a “thousand hours” now can be done with AI in tens. Something useful, I mean.

    Social media on the other hand is a plague of garbage and I wish facebook and twitter would be deleted off the net

    You clearly weren’t around when it all started. Social media was peddled as a legitimately useful thing. People organized around Facebook groups, and stopped paying telecommunication companies for SMS usage because of WhatsApp. LinkedIn became the dominant player in white collar job seeking. In Asia, super apps like Line or Kakao or WeChat became so popular, they became the mainstream way of finding, contacting and paying businesses for services. Twitter was the place for legitimate reporters to post short form content.

    It all went downhill afterwards. Most people thought, at the beginning, that social media would revolutionize the world as we knew it. They just didn’t know it wouldn’t be in a good way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Maybe put your response into AI and have it re-write it for you to come across as less of a dick

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    My .md files have a prompt to keep things honest, so either way, you would have gotten the same result.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Tell it to be less autistic then

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    In my house, we don’t shame anyone for being neurodivergent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Maybe put your response into AI and have it re-write it for you to come across as less of a dick

    Weird take. You would have turned down a job because it takes “too long”? The whole point of wages is to get money for your time.

    I have an unending number of jobs, a job that takes a thousand hours means I can't spend a thousand hours doing other more important jobs, in this case AI made the job so much quicker to do I was able to fit it in, yay productivity

    It has also helped me speed up individual jobs that take ages before

    You clearly weren’t around when it all started

    Why would you say this and then insert the POPULAR opinion at the time and then APPLY that to me? Does a fuckin lemmy user look like your average lemming?

    At the time Facebook came out I had already been using internet forums for over 5 years and Facebook users used real names, which (if you remember at the time :P ) wasn't a thing us cool kids did, using your real name on the internet was for firstname.lastname@hotmail.com losers

    and stopped paying telecommunication companies for SMS usage because of WhatsApp

    Whatsapp is a messenger app not a social network but you did get me thinking about how I talked to my family so I had to go back through my old screenshots and phone screenshots, at first I just spoke to them irl and my brother on MSN Messenger then I setup a home XMPP network and used https://psi-im.org/ ! How good is that! Then moved to Slack and finally to Telegram, I think I was going to use Whatsapp but Facebook bought it in February 19, 2014 and I detested facebook and declined to use it

    Most people thought, at the beginning, that social media would revolutionize the world as we knew it

    I don't care about most people, I thought facebook sucked, Twitter even more so, I haven't signed up to twitter ever, I find short responses generate shit arguments and I've seen nothing to counter this, twitter is the internets sewerage pipe, pumping out garbage shit 24x7

    Also not a huge fan of reddit these days as it appears to be on a downtrend towards youtube comments tier garbage, people don't bother to read the article and instead just post their current opinion even if it directly contradicts what the article said wasn't happening (that said not much better here on Lemmy either)

    I did sign up for Mastodon though, and sadly it was like what I'd seen of twitter (since people can't help but post twitter screenshots literally every fucking where) but instead of right wing American garbage it was left wing American garbage (that said not much better here on Lemmy either)

    Anyway, thanks for the trip down memory lane but social media always sucked and was never useful to me, AI on the other hand has been incredible for me despite what you think I think

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Weird that you responded twice to my comments, but alright.

    I don't care about most people, I thought facebook sucked, Twitter even more so

    We weren’t talking about you personally, because you yourself cannot make up a statistically significant share of the market. Social media was what it was and is what it is, regardless of if you used it or what you thought about it. AI is the same, and I don’t care if now it is useful to you, I care that, given so many terrible examples of technologies taken to mainstream and creating all sorts of problems, people still are naive enough to think that AI is not going to fuck us over ten fold.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    That's not what steganography is. There is no hidden message here.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Your assertion baffles me. The CC client is sending information about its execution context back to Anthropic HQ in a sneaky, obfuscated way that most people wouldn't notice.

    If that's not a hidden message, if that's not steganography, what is?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    It's not sending it back. It's essentially watermarking the output, so that it can be identified if it appears somewhere unexpected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 month ago

    It modifies the prompt, aka the input, not the output. It is smuggling 3 bits of secret user/session data in a wrapper that doesn't look like it contains that data. As the article explains:

    So the marker becomes part of the system context sent to the model.

    This is a normal timestamp on a prompt:

    Today's date is 2026-07-11.

    But if your system timezone is a Chinese mainland timezone, it looks like:

    Today's date is 2026/07/11.

    Then, if your base URL includes a keyword like "deepseek," it silently replaces the apostrophe from a ' to a ʼ:

    Todayʼs date is 2026-07-11.

    Or if the base URL has one of the domains on the list, like any .cn domain, it replaces the apostrophe with another apostrophe character:

    Today’s date is 2026-07-11.

    And if it has both a URL and a keyword on the watchlist, the prompt context includes:

    Todayʹs date is 2026-07-11

    That's 3 bits of information: does this system have a mainland Chinese time zone, does the base URL contain a known keyword (associated with Chinese AI competitors) or a known domain (associated with mainland China or its major tech companies). And it sneaks it on by without making it obvious.

    That's steganography.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Yeah I thought steganography was hiding messages in images.

    Ok I just looked it up, apparently it can be anything. Images, audio, video, or even text.

    I remember I had this Perl module once that would convert passwords into a binary string and then convert that string into spaces and tabs. Looked like a blank file. I guess that was technically steganography.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    No, that's encoding. If you hid that message inside another message, that would be steganography.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    It is a message hidden in a message. The hidden message is the binary password, and the container message is "[blank]"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    If i understand correctly it is a message within a blank file. So it is not steganography, I suppose.

    At least I dont think a seemingly blank file would pass as a valid message.

    That's what I think is defining for steganography is that it is deceptive because you might not assume another secret message is hidden within the original message.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    The decoy container could be literally anything. Sure good steganography would be hidden in something that looks real, like a jpeg or a music file, because it gives it a reason for existing at a glance. That's not to say it couldn't be a blank plaintext file, it just might arouse more suspicions and be subjected to more scrutiny

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -48 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

    What a stupid take, and entirely AI written to boot.

    Of course Anthropic wants to detect if they are getting distilled.

    And of course they need to do that covertly. Does the "author" of this article expect them to tell attackers how to hide? Really?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 1 month ago (1 child)
    • Step 1: Train a model on all the stolen content on the internet you can get your hands on
    • Step 2: Complain and bitch about all the other LLMs paying you money to use your model to train theirs, and try to prevent it
    • Step 3: ??
    • Step 4: Profit
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Ah but you see in the agreement it says the llm tex output cannot be used to train your ai.
    You have to respect the license that text is published under when you train your ai on the internet, as long as the internet is a website by anthropic.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago

    When did nerds get so spoiled and entitled? Was it when every parent on America sent their little snot nosed video game playing asshole to college so he could “be the next bill gates”?

    The current “AI boom” is the first settler-colonial project of knowledge and it must be treated as such.

  • source
  • parent