Exposed credentials means that somebody got sloppy the password. So yeah, “stolen creds”. Give the fact that a) NYT seems knows which credentials were exposed, and b) We haven’t seen hundreds of other high(er) profile companies have their private repos breached, it is far more likely that NYT fucked up, and not Microsoft (which is what you implied, with nothing to back it up - other than a very narrow-minded definition of the word hack).

deleted by creator

Upvoted because this article was an interesting read.

This actual data is not necessarily representative of the entire situation

You keep saying that, but never back it up with any reason.

Everyone here agrees the data is incomplete, but that it’s the best data we have. Only you keep implying that it’s incorrect because [ever less verifiable, unspecified reasons]. Holy hypocrisy, batman.

Do you mind? We’re trying to have a circlejerk here.

I’m sorry you felt the need to denounce claims in videos while openly admitting you don’t even know what the claims are.

I doubt either one of you will ever hear from them. I guess they haven’t even watched the video to begin with.

I didn’t know those were LLMs, TIL.

You’re missing the point. I’ll make your example more specific.

Well when fraud/rape/murder happens we have laws. So no problems.

Those things happen. Creating a LLM based on copyrighted material without permission happens - it’s not a hypothetical. But even then, giving a punishment after the fact does not make the initial crime “no problem”, as you put it.

I don’t think anyone is faulting the machines for this, just the people who instruct the machines to do it.

Would you be okay with applying that argument for any crime?

Bingo.

Using it to (create a tool to) create derivatives of the work on a massive scale.

Maybe make your point yourself, instead of asking people to Google it for you?

“All I did was misrepresent something harmless, done by a company that’s doing so much more horrible things that I shouldn’t be using their product in the first place, and now people are calling me out on it. Clearly, they are wrong.”

No censorship / unable to delete content? What happens when somebody decides to post illegal content like CP? I know that’s an easy target, but either it has a way to deal with that, or it’s going to attract a very scary crowd, at least as a subset.

Thanks for putting an actual summary in there. Much appreciated.

The best moment to act was yesterday. The second best moment is now.

It’s not too late.

No, the whole point is that an isp should not be forced to do anything, unless ordered to do so by a court.

As the title mentions, this an endless chase if you approach it like this. Vigilante mobs aren’t going to solve this, it’s going to take specialist agencies with mandates to request data civilians can’t. Crimes are being committed there (not murders, but a good way to get the scare votes, I suppose), and there are laws in place to deal with that.

As mentioned several times in this thread, shifting the responsibility for what is allowed to be said on the Internet from governments to corporate entities is a terrible precedent.

Edit: Nevermind. I see you’re also responsible for this wonderful gem:

The position is intellectually dishonest unless you’re actually pro-killing-transgender people.

There’s no point in arguing with you.

Hear hear. Obviously this site should be shut down. But it should be done so on basis of fair trial. Not because of mob justice, or corporations that answer only to shareholders.