Do you do this at the chromium/V8 level or CDP?

I've been having mixed success with CDP and was thinking of going to the level below, but it feels like just getting Chromium itself to baseline chrome detection profile is significant work

Why does web get a free pass?

I was actually very surprised Garmin supported the country I'm in. They don't even support the language script, I get squiggles, but payments - better than Google Wallet.

I've seen payments being another problem - but Garmin watch handles it for me. And paying with a watch becomes a conversation starter with merchants for some reason.

Android also takes permissions away from apps after they haven't been used in a while anyway.

So most of the battery consumption will be from the apps that you actively need and use. Android's battery usage screen backs this up.

The metro app I installed when I was on a trip in Istanbul is still on my phone, but it's dormant. Yes, I should definitely uninstall it, but I really can't be bothered to do this all the time. On stock Android, phone takes care of this for me. On GrapheneOS, either I take that responsibility or face the consequences - which I don't really want.

GrapheneOS has some hardening in this phase, which as I understand, essentially has to rebuild all apps without cache.

And as I have a ton of apps, I was parked for 30 minutes waiting my phone to boot up.

And because of this app optimization thing, I always delayed OS update finalizations, which probably isn't the best thing.

Unfortunately, GrapheneOS recommendation to this was to have fewer apps. Had to let it go after that.

Although I do believe Anthropic knew this and this kind of involvement is still beneficial to them, as it still slows down competition, which is their sole objective when you brush off marketing sprinkles from their statements.

The ones with the required knowledge probably already know how to produce them, with nothing but public, easily searchable information.

But this also looks quite useful to understand how CC dynamic workflows work. Was thinking of implementing something similar in my homemade orchestration system.

Did you get claude itself to RE the dynamic workflows?

Since currently there's no way to verify if poisoning happened or not, I don't trust Anthropic anymore, regardless of what they say.

But my trust towards OAI is also brittle - what if they also do it, or start doing it?

I want to have a verifiable way to know that the prompt I sent was the prompt the model received. I want to know if anything was injected as well - I understand they may not necessarily be able to reveal the exact steering, but at least give me the steering category and its hash or something.

But if Anthropic gets their way with regulatory capture, this could be the only future we'll see.

To think that they didn't expect the backlash speaks volumes about how much shady things they're doing which is not publicly known.

And OpenAI's general communication as of late feels more grounded, much more pleasant than Anthropic comms. They also seem to be focusing on users quite a bit more.

Anthropic's communication style feels like I somehow owe them my life or something.

This was very different a year ago.

- And this were the first steps of Anthropic establishing worldwide corporate technocracy.

- And this is when Anthropic lost and everyone got access to AI.

Similar to how IBM's defeat allowed us to have PCs.

Then there's running inference service of open weights, which doesn't necessarily require opening a lab. You can grab Chinese model weights and sell inference.

Anthropic wants to make sure nobody can open a new domestic lab, or provide inference services of unauthorized open weight models, or release open weights if model is good. It is regulatory capture - it covers all areas that are dangers to Anthropic's bottom line.

Okay, I don't understand how legitimate access is granted then. Surely, Dario isn't saying to ban Sonnet, because I can definitely make it do cyber harm, as most exploits that I've seen in the wild with my own eyes were trivial.

So the only way I see his proposal working is:

- No open weights, AI is centralized in the hands of few

- We get AI-FAA that sets the rules and monitors

- If I want to do a security scan of my codebase, I get a time and scope limited license from AI-FAA that I upload to claude that will allow it to run the security scan in cloud with their models - Claude Mythos Scanner(TM).

Dario's proposal ultimately requires that people lose direct access to inference via API. Is this why they've been building SaaS clones with AI bolted on?

Did Anthropic unlock a legal way to steal people's money and call it saving the world AND get away with it?

Just how much of that infinite money goes into Anthropic's PR department that they're able to pull this off and still be loved by users?

Isn't it concerning that a single company unilaterally decided for the world that they're the ultimate gatekeepers and they decide who gets access to the frontier artifical intelligence and in which capacity?

Who elected Amodei to decide which projects get to have the access to a dual-use cyber model and which get a model which sabotages? How is this not straight from E Corp's rulebook?