_AzMoo

That's right. Obviously they need to build a network before they become a CEO, but that's what Ivy League's, family connections, and exclusive private schools are for.

A CEO's job isn't the one that everybody here apparently thinks it is. A CEO's job is networking, marketing and PR. They get paid the way they do because they can get into the rooms they need to get into to build the inter-business relationships they need to build.

Trusted locations were added to VSCode in 2021.

https://code.visualstudio.com/updates/v1_57

This attack is exactly why IDE's have a concept of trusted and untrusted locations.

It screams intentional to me.

https://connectid.com.au/

They're brokering the negotiation, they're not actually the identity provider. The broker has no knowledge of your actual identity. So in this case, the identity provider (such as your bank) knows that you've been referred by the broker and that you wish to provide your verified age and only that age. The social media company knows that you've chosen to use the specific broker to verify your age, but not who the actual identity provider is. The broker knows that a request with your metadata (IP addr, HTTP headers, etc.) has been initiated between a specific social media site and a specific identity provider, but they don't have access to your actual identity.

Nobody in the negotiation has a complete picture. To correlate it all together, you would need logs from all 3. And at least in the Australian case, due to our data retention laws, if you've got logs from the social media provider, then you can already associate the user with a specific identity by requesting the information from the ISP which they legally must retain for 2 years, so it's really not necessary.

All this concern about social media privacy is a little ridiculous IMO. If you're using social media then you've already compromised your identity. If somebody wants to find out who you are, they already can. They don't need a verified identity, and social media companies seem to me more than willing to cooperate with governments. Law enforcement has been using this type of correlating data for years to establish identity in CSAM investigations.

But in Australia they're actively fighting against it. Why?

In Australia, the government has certified OAuth2 Identity Providers which act as a broker between social media sites and a provider that can verify your age, such as a bank. This allows age to be verified by a provider, with the social media provider having no access to your identity. If the social media companies chose to support this, they would be complying with the legislation. It's not the government forcing you to identify yourself.

It'd be fine if they were just using chat apps. It's not the communication that's the problem, or the bullying. That's going to happen regardless, and it's nothing new to online spaces. If anything, having online spaces available is helpful, because kids who are excluded at school are able to find places they fit in online. It's the algorithmic feeds and short-form video content. It's flooding their brains in their most formative time.

What I don't understand is why parents don't take responsibility for reducing the contact with such harmful products.

It's critical mass. I didn't want my 13-year-old daughter on social media, because even 7 years ago we knew the harms. We were firm, and we kept her off it. The problem was that we were attempting to help her with her mental health, but when you're literally the only kid who didn't read the group chat from your friend group the night before, that does remarkable damage to your mental health. It cuts off an enormous part of their social life.

If the majority of kids weren't using it then it'd be easy, but because it's their primary form of communication, it's incredibly difficult.

If you draw a firm boundary with that contributor, and they continue to push, ban them.

"This doesn't meet the standards of our project for reason xyz. Please refrain from submitting further PRs that do not adhere to our contribution guidelines outlined in CONTRIBUTING.md."

If they continue, ban them.

You'll need an iPhone to manage it. It's the same with managing an iPad's Family Sharing settings. Need another Apple device to manage it properly.

Perhaps this is true if Erica is 16, but if Erica is 10 then I would like to be notified if she doesn't make it to school safely.

I find the current recommendations from spotify or youtube music don't actually help me find new music very well. They just end up shoehorning me, instead of widening my options.

That's not necessarily true. Who's to say the security researchers wouldn't have found it if they'd searched the code manually?

My (extensive) experience with LLM code generation is that it has the same issues you describe in your field. Hallucinations, over-engineering, misses important requirements/patterns.

But engineers have these same problems. The key is that the content creator (engineers for codegen, doctors for medicine) is still responsible for the output of the AI, as if they wrote it themselves. If they make a mistake with an AI (eg, include false data - hallucinations), they should be held accountable in the same way they would if they made a mistake without it.

Which is exactly why LLMs use these techniques so often. They're very common.

Is there a specific definition for intelligence?

You should always have an architecture in mind. But it should be appropriate for the scale and complexity of your application _right now_, as opposed to what you imagine it will be in five years. Let it evolve, but always have it.

I use Zoom and Spotify and both of those have gone downhill dramatically. Spotify to the extend that I really don't use it anymore.

Because it's formatted as an introductory part of a document they're already going to read.

In Australia this is actually an issue for low-income/underprivileged children in schools. Some parents don't give their kids breakfast or lunch, because they can't afford it or they just don't care.

Some schools run a "breakfast club" that everybody's welcome to attend, where they provide things like toast or cereal to kids that don't get breakfast at home, and it's couched in shame-softening language, though most kids know that if you go to breakfast club it's probably because you can't actually afford breakfast.

Schools will often have some bread and spreads available in the office for kids who are sent to school without lunch. I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I know that in some schools this is just funded voluntarily by some of the staff who will pick up more bread or whatever when it's required, because they don't want to see kids go hungry.

I think the idea of having lunch provided as part of your school fees is actually a good one. No kid should go hungry, or be subject to humiliation and shame, because their parents can't afford or can't be bothered to provide them lunch.

I use LLMs a huge amount in my work as a senior software engineer to flesh out the background information required to make my actual contributions understandable to those without the same background as me. eg, if I want to write a proposal on using SLO's and error budgets to make data driven decisions about which errors need addressing and which don't, inside a hybrid kubernetes and serverless environment, I could do a few things:

* Not provide background information and let people figure it out for themselves. This will not help me achieve my goals.

* Link them to Google's SRE book and hope they read it. Still not achieving my goals, because they won't.

* Spend 3 hours writing the relevant background information out for them to read as part of my proposal. This will achieve my goals, but take an extra 3 hours.

* Tell the LLM what I'm looking for and why, then let it write it for me in 2 minutes, instead of 3 hours. I can check it over, make sure it's got everything, refine it a little, and I've still saved 2.5 hours.

So for me, I think the author has missed a primary reason people use LLMs. It saves a bunch of time.

I somewhat feel that there was a generation that had it easier

I don't think so. I've been doing this for nearly 35 years now, and there's always been a lot to learn. Each layer of abstraction developed makes it easier to quickly iterate towards a new outcome faster or with more confidence, but hides away complexity that you might eventually need to know. In a lot of ways it's easier these days, because there's so much information available at your fingertips when you need it, presented in a multitude of different formats. I learned my first programming language by reading a QBasic textbook trying to debug a text-based adventure game that crashed at a critical moment. I had no Internet, no BBS, nobody to help, except my Dad who was a solo RPG programmer who had learned on the job after being promoted from sweeping floors in a warehouse.

And yet my company owns the copyright on all of the content I produce?

We use batteries in South Australia to stabilize our grid already.

Yeah, you're right about the liability part. But regardless, as a parent of teenagers, being able to justify an unpopular decision with "it's the law" instead of "research shows it's potentially bad for you in the medium to long term" is extremely valuable.

You don't necessarily need to actually attempt to globally enforce it. It's like speeding, right? Everybody knows the law, and a lot of people choose to break it. We can't check everybody's speed all the time, so instead we selectively enforce.

The real change though comes from parent's perceptions. Right now there's age limits of 14-years-old on most social media platforms, however most parents just see this as a ToS thing, and nobody cares about actually violating it. Once it becomes law, the parents are suddenly responsible (and liable) for ensuring their children are not breaking the law by accessing social media. It's not going to stop everybody, but it'll certainly move the needle on a lot of people who are currently apathetic to the ToS of social media platforms.

There are a lot of countries that don't have extradition treaties with the US.

How does the FBI arrest somebody outside of the US?