Also, this particular attack requires administrator privileges and bypasses a security boundary that doesn't even exist on e.g. Linux. Linux doesn't have driver signatures and root can easily install a new kernel module.

Corporate (and SEO) writing has always been overly verbose and tried to sound fancy. In fact, this probably is where LLMs learned that style. There's no reliable heuristic to tell human- and AI-writing apart.

There's a lot of worry about people being fooled by AI fakes, but I'm also worried about false positives, people seeing "AI" everywhere. In fact, this is already happening in the art communities, with accusations flying left and right.

People are too confident in their heuristics. "You are using whole sentences? Bot!" I fear this will make people simplify their writing style to avoid the accussations, which won't really accomplish anything, because AIs already can be prompted to avoid the default word-salad style.

I miss the time before LLMs...

This doesn't seem to be in conflict with what the GP said ("supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively"). It seems to me that many people have a problem with thieves not being punished at all.

Could you share some of this evidence?

I'm sorry, but I think you may be spending too much time online.

It feels like whenever the author of bcachefs comes up, it's always because of some drama.

Just the other day he clashed with Linus Torvalds: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wj1Oo9-g-yuwWuHQZU8v=VAsB...

My reading is that he's very passionate, so he wants to "move fast and break things" and doesn't get why the others aren't necessarily very happy about it.

https://github.com/swiftlang/llvm-project

Back in 2019, many outlets[1] reported that Putin was still using Windows XP. Why? Because in a publicity photo, the taskbar on his computer had a blueish color. And some people even came up with theories like "it's because it's the last version that hasn't been backdoored".

The problem is that this isn't true. If you look at the photo in full resolution[2], it's clear that it was Windows 7 (or maybe even 8 with a Start menu mod).

[1] - For example: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7800831/Vladimir-Pu...

[2] - http://static.kremlin.ru/media/events/photos/big2x/W2kaDAtDz...

Apparently there are all kinds of goodies in that dump, like previously unknown betas of MS-DOS and OS/2, but there are no links to the dump itself. It's a shame that the community is so secretive about this :(

This is more like a "speed warner" than a "speed limiter".

Frankly, it's shocking how bad they are at it.

He doesn't quote any specific part of the (A)GPL that supports his argument (frankly, I doubt he's ever read it), he just keeps throwing out the buzzword "viral" as if it means anything. He clearly doesn't understand the concept of CLAs and copyright law in general.

This is a very bad post, and I'm surprised it made the front page.

They're mainly invested in the ARM ecosystem, companies such as Allwinner, HiSilicon, Rockchip and UNISOC are very successful in this market. They also make x86 CPUs (Zhaoxin) and have developed their own domestic MIPS-derived architecture (LoongArch).

No, what actually happened is they published a short 7-page blurb[1] and it mentions Delphi in a single sentence: "Some examples of memory safe languages are Python, Java, C#, Go, Delphi/Object Pascal, Swift, Ruby, Rust, and Ada."

It's just a single sentence. It doesn't elaborate what specific features of those languages make them memory safe.

Delphi (and Ada) were most likely included on this list by mistake. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a result of some intern googling "memory safe languages".

These two languages are not memory safe. They don't have a garbage collector, borrow checker, or any other equivalent mechanism that eliminates memory errors. They both use manual memory management, which can be partially automated with RAII, just like C++.

[1] - https://media.defense.gov/2023/Apr/27/2003210083/-1/-1/0/CSI...

The GPL doesn't explicitly define the concept of derivative work. The FSF's interpretation is that linking creates a derivative work, but there's no universal consensus among lawyers on this issue.

LWN has an article that presents a few different views on this topic: https://lwn.net/Articles/548216/