Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jolmg's commentslogin

That's interesting. That's the first time I've seen a "[deleted]" comment. IIRC, HN would just disallow deleting if somebody replied. Maybe this is from replying on an already deleted comment.

I think it still does, but maybe we found a bug. I might have commented at the same time they deleted?

Probably Meshtastic people sending DMCA takedown lol. I could imagine HN moderation would have to delete it.

It was my comment. I deleted it, but I was surprised to see the ghost of my comment.

Deleted it because it was a shallow complaint about LoRa being proprietary. However, looking closer, it's not that bad. The physical layer is unavailable, but the link layer protocol spec is downloadable by anyone. Meanwhile, DASH7, an open-source alternative, requires you to be accepted into the alliance before letting you download the spec. Might be a simple thing, but they do advise requesting membership with a company or university email.


Do companies that claim E2EE support face consequences if they don't abide by IETF's definition? Not like IETF governs them.

> Signal still doesn't allow you to backup/export chat history on iOS into an open format?

> I then deleted Signal and migrated to iMessage/WhatsApp and called it a day.

That doesn't fix anything, does it?

Last time I tried to export a years-long WhatsApp chat, I was only able to export a few-weeks-worth, IIRC. WhatsApp chat exports also don't include media. It's just a txt file. The backup is limited to using Google and it's done in such a way that you're not allowed to download it yourself.

The only way to export the chat was to use the web client and scroll all the way to the top, then copy-paste the HTML out of web-inspector once everything loaded. I don't think that's possible anymore. IIRC, the web client now tops at some point with a message like "use the Android app to look further back".


> That doesn't fix anything, does it?

But moving to Signal doesn't either. You're moving from one walled garden to another. If you're going to burn the resources and "political points" encouraging people to move it's better be worth it - right now for the casual user Signal is worse than WhatsApp or even Telegram.


Got a warning about vizcom.ai wanting to connect to any device on my local network...

> There is also longer form business fan fiction. It usually follows this template: there is a hero - a humble manager/sales person, and a villain - a cocky, nerdy software developer. The villain claims that some task is impossible or takes months to complete. Then the humble hero (equipped with Opus 4.5) completes the task in 2 hours. The villain is then humiliated/fired and everyone lives happily ever after.

Can you share examples? I've never seen something like that.


All comments seem to assume the officers lied about not using AI, but the article doesn't actually say that:

> officers had found this material through a Google search

> the erroneous result concerning the West Ham v Maccabi Tel Aviv match arose as result of a use of Microsoft Co Pilot

> his force used fictional output from Microsoft Copilot

What this says is that the material originates from Copilot.

I suppose you can read that and interpret that they lied about the Google search, but if you assume incompetence over malice, the more likely interpretation is that they didn't properly verify their source found through Google. It could have been the source of the source of their source that used Copilot, not the officers themselves.

The takeaway here is that even if you don't use AI tools and do things as you did before AI, you may still be basing your work on AI content.

A parallel may someone saying they don't use AI in their code because they don't use AI tools, but then it turns out that a dependency of a dependency is built by AI.


True. The biggest problem with "AI" going forward may only be that it doesn't sign its work.

> stop their team using Copilot

> If the officer had used tools after

They didn't use tools. They did a Google search and assumed the results didn't originate from an AI tool.

The lesson from the article is that even if you don't use AI tools, AI content may still creep into your investigation.


They specifically used Copilot according to the article.

It doesn't say they used Copilot. It says they used output *from* Copilot.

> his force used fictional output from Microsoft Copilot

That doesn't mean they used Copilot; it only means that the content originates from Copilot. They apparently got it from Google search result:

> officers had found this material through a Google search

And apparently that source either used Copilot or the source of their source used Copilot, etc.


Might be more of a difference between what to do in your working (employee) life vs in your private life. In your private life, you can't get scraps because it's generally work on things you own, like a business, personal fitness, skills, etc. In your employee life, you're generally working on things that you don't own for recognition to get a promotion or raise. There the recognition is the entire point and people may not look too deeply into who did what, so you may need to be more overt about things.

> I'd deem it rude that something as low-effort as an AI generated blog post was shared here.

The one that shares needn't be the one that wrote the piece, and it's not always obvious when something was AI-written.


Except it's not a bug that found use. It's intentional behavior. From https://specifications.freedesktop.org/clipboard/latest/:

> The rationale for this behavior is mostly that [having a unified clipboard] has a lot of problems, namely:

> - inconsistent with Mac/Windows

> - confusingly, selecting anything overwrites the clipboard

> - not efficient with a tool such as xclipboard [(tool that maintains a history of specifically CLIPBOARD; it would be messy to keep a history of all selections)]

> - you should be able to select text, then paste the clipboard over it, but that doesn’t work if the selection and clipboard are the same

> - the Copy menu item is useless and does nothing, which is confusing

> - if you think of PRIMARY as the current selection, Cut doesn’t make any sense since the selection simultaneously disappears and becomes the current selection


The selection buffer is easier to understand if thought about more simply. Middle click to “put my selection here”.

The actual clipboard is a separate feature in my mind.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: