Anyway, I’d be more sympathetic to this way of thinking if windows wasn’t getting worse over time. But it seems like investment in the OS is being disfavored for investment in AI-in-things-no-one-wants-AI-in, which is inverse of the subsidy direction you propose

What’s tiresome about this is that people don’t even bother to edit it. I use LLMs to draft long-form text all the time because I think the hardest part is getting something on the page to refine. But I would be embarrassed to leave LLM tells like this in the final result, if only because I want people to know that I actually cared about what I’m asking them to read and that I value their time.

It’s especially ironic here because this is about lauding a person who cut through the impersonal behavior of a large organization. Evidently this person was not worth even an editorial pass over the article though.

But I have very little reason to trust that they actually don’t use my data. The incentives to violate the data controls are so great with the billions sloshing around AI companies. The worst that would happen if they are found to be abusing my data would be civil penalties (i.e. fines) that I’m sure executives would see as the cost of doing business.

Ideally there would be an attested zero data retention option, but I’m sure that’s not available.

It’s undeniable that the proverbial guns for hire make it easy (if not cheap) to target basically anyone — but just because the vibes are bad doesn’t mean we can just say “it’s common knowledge that …”

The fact is mitigations are costly in terms of convenience and ease of use. Helping people make informed choices about whether to enable mitigations and bear that cost requires more than platitudes imo

Not sure who’s buying these or if it’s just people dreaming about finding a rube.

If anything it’s the opposite: issues demonstrated by cve-rs are _language bugs_ and are _fixable_ in principle. “Safe Rust should be memory-safe” is a well-defined, falsifiable contract that the compiler can be measured against. Meanwhile memory unsafety is a feature of the semantics of C++ and so it would be absurd to file a bug against gcc complaining that it compiled your faulty code.