When I think about the security of a computer system, I have a specific scale I rate it on:
1. The US government can crack it *OR* the government of China can crack it (equivalent)
2. The government of Israel can crack it
3. My friend Kristin could crack it
4. The government of Russia can crack it
5. A nation-state not listed above can crack it
6. A well-qualified single infosec professional could crack it
7. I could crack it
New York Times articles be like:
All Experts Say Water Is Wet, But Is It? Three Unstable People That Want You To Join Their MLM Religion Disagree.
a critical skill in the age of #AI is knowing if you’re in a critical situation that demands accuracy or the other kind, where you just need a guess to point you in the right direction. You’ll always have huge negative impacts (e.g. quality) from AI if you don’t know when their usage is appropriate.
i like this phrasing, “a drunk guy at a bar”. He could be right, but maybe not. How much are you risking by trusting him?
https://attractive.space/@Setok/112123708506055669 via @Setok
@[email protected] @[email protected] one should trust #AI #LLM facts just as much as you’d trust a drunk guy in a bar. For the same reasons. It may raise some interesting tidbit, but you absolutely have to check it if you plan to use it for anything. I actually think the use of LLMs for knowledge sources is a misguided use of the tech.
From a related conversation
Dear $god_of_small_negotiations,
Is it possible to get the research engineers to start putting their data requests in the [ticket-tracker] rather than chat-bombing my junior peers who don't feel empowered to say no
If you grant this request, I will burn an offering on every oncall shift change