Imagine WW3 kicking off from TikTok. Not even a cool battle or anything, just massive misinformation campaigns to incite violence and false flag attacks

Also

The devices set to be prohibited include all types of smartwatches and wearable devices as well.

I’m surprised they weren’t already restricting most personal electronics in sensitive spaces. That’s pretty basic stuff

I would not say

any self-respecting malware writer will download [powertools] and…

I’m not as familiar with mass-market malware, but APT-level gear generally doesn’t try to make use of such easily observed events. The more network traffic malware appropriates, the greater the probability that it’s caught.

Simply put, Powertools puts several functions within arms reach for malware looking to stay under the radar. Without it, malware needs to bring more of its own code which increases footprint. Living off the land exploits in particular love the presence of these kinds of programs

I always thought it wasn’t included by default to mitigate malware damage to a system. Malware needs to be just a little bit more advanced if it can’t hijack Powertools to do what it wants

It’s not as purpose-built, but its replacing a ton of airframes which are decidedly not as stealthy as an F22. Think of all of the F16s, F18s, and AV-8s being replaced by F35s

Piezo master race checking in

Yes. This is generally agreed upon as being a terminal escalation.

Attacking diplomatic missions very quickly turns into no diplomacy between the two countries. This doesn’t leave many options other than military actions on the table.

deleted by creator

Why should the interviewee assume that?

This could very well be a test to see if the applicant has an idea of how a project scales or how they need to interact with other departments or track down compliance information. It could also test the applicant’s ability to provide a sanity check to a boss’s idea before they pitch something that the team can’t actually do

https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/57650

Nuclear deterrent because it’s submarine-borne. If a country makes a first strike on the UK, their submarines, which are ideally hidden and steaming around in oceans somewhere, can make a retaliation strike. They’re still equipped with nuclear warheads but aren’t necessarily intended for a first strike.

You can destroy the UK, but you won’t escape unscathed.

You’re right. I was focused on this part above. I made like an AI and jumped the gun

These results come at a time when the US military has been testing such chatbots based on a type of AI called a large language model (LLM) to assist with military planning during simulated conflicts, enlisting the expertise of companies such as Palantir and Scale AI. Palantir declined to comment and Scale AI did not respond to requests for comment.

The writers of the article are reporting on use of these models by the military. They aren’t using the models. If I remember right they called out some models developed by one of the defense contractors like palantir

I’m not sure where our disconnect is. We have a situation where both sides can cooperate, one side can defect, or both sides can defect. Call it whatever you want, it’s the same scenario.

Here it’s with planning for military force. Do you risk a nuclear strike to save yourself from one? If you can get a first strike (defect), then you win. If you both refrain (cooperate), then you stay alive. If you both attempt a first strike (defect), you all lose.

Change the words around and it’s the same.

Both suspects don’t tell (cooperate), both get minimum or no jail time. One tells on the other (defects), that one gets off but the other gets maximum. Both tell on each other (defect), both get some jail time.

Without being in the room, we can only go off what the article lays out. These are wargaming scenarios though, so escalation is a very real concern. If both sides are running these models to provide recommendations and both are pushing for greater conflict, you find yourself in a prisoner’s dilemma real quick.

Interesting. There was a study put out some time ago that had 40 or so game theorists develop algorithms to compete against each other. The most successful algorithm cooperated with the opponent until they defected, at which point they would defect the next round.

They never performed a first strike. Only one retaliation strike for each attack their opponent performed. After the retaliation, it was back to cooperating with no long term ill will.

This breaks down as a business grows. When your business employs a significant portion of the local economy, it accumulates soft power that can rival that of local governments, all while having little to none of the accountability or representation that one would otherwise expect.

Management is likely being fired to an extent, but one used to expect those with the authority and responsibility to be in such a position of power to be held accountable. We’re long gone from the days where a leader would personally take accountability and step down while making unpopular or harmful decisions.

I don’t have a perfect solution to this but I clearly think something needs to change.

Maybe look at this another way:

The government should represent the interests of the people. If the people have shown interest in curbing these layoff behaviors, where thousands of people lose their jobs while management remains in place with no apparent cuts to the top billing, then why would lawmakers not want to translate these interests into legislation?

I get a reasonable wariness of keeping the government out of private business, but if you have a town of 10 people, all employed by local business owner, and that business owner lays off two people, you have a large percentage of the population affected. If the townspeople enact a local ordinance to prevent this kind of behavior in the future, would they be in the wrong?

Yeah, I should have clarified IOS. Their phones and tablets are locked down with jailbreaks few and far between.

Ironically, there’s no easy way to block ads on a modern Apple device. You know, Google’s competition?

What’s that? All I see is *******