As a cybersecurity guy, it's things like this study, which said:
Overall, we find that participants who had access to an AI assistant based on OpenAI’s codex-davinci-002 model wrote significantly less secure code than those without access. Additionally, participants with access to an AI assistant were more likely to believe they wrote secure code than those without access to the AI assistant.
A coworker of mine has worked with CrowdStrike in the past; I haven't. He said that the releases he was familiar with from them in the past were all staged into groups and customers were encouraged to test internally before applying them; not sure if this is a different product or what, but it seems like a big step backwards of what he's saying is right.
Hardware controls are meaningless if an attacker gets you to click on a dodgy link in a phishing email or you fall for a social engineering scam when "Microsoft" calls you because your computer has a virus.
You seem to be taking about something other than enshittification, which has a specific meaning and isn't just places not respecting privacy or whatever. Per Cory Doctorow (who invented the term) via Wikipedia:
Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. I call this enshittification, and it is a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a "two sided market", where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, hold each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.
If enshittification is what you're assist interested in reducing, check out Cory's book, The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation.
I think you mean "than other thieves stole." Don't want to accidentally imply they aren't thieves.
Saw this a while ago and it solves that "paradox" nicely.
I mean, the domestic businesses are the ones who own Congress and are using it to get rid of a competitor.
FYI, what you're talking about is the ; the Deep Web is different. "
" refers to places on the regular Internet that are not indexed by Google and the other major search engines; you don't need Tor to get to them.
Seems like a weird and random assortment of items. Why was Google Hangouts mentioned, but not Gmail? What about Discord, Slack, etc? Or smart TVs? Almost felt more like guerrilla advertising for a few niche products.
The thing is, truth decay has been going on for a while now. 2016 was of course the year of "alternative facts," but even before then anyone with sufficient money and/or clout could redefine truth to some degree.
What we're going to see with ChatGPT and deepfakes is really just a democratization of truth decay: what was once the province of only a few will now be open to us all.
Exactly: a large chunk of the time, videos seem to simply be a way to stretch the content that could be a bullet list into a not-easily-parseable mess of content sandwiched into "Hey lovely people.... Don't forget to SMASH that like and subscribe button!"
Sometimes videos are done well, but an annoying number of them are just attempts to monetize fluid content with a lot of padding; they're like the recipe blogs of the video world.
There are lawsuits: https://techcrunch.com/2024/09/02/crowdstrike-faces-onslaught-of-legal-action-from-faulty-software-update/
These things will probably take years to play out.