@Zacryon@feddit.org

comments

• This guy is a SI. Super Idiot.

  on Trump says the US is officially renaming AI to ‘super intelligence’ in c/technology@lemmy.world · 1d ago

• Given how many Anthropic fans there are, I am not entirely sure. Marking sarcasm in text can help.

  on Anthropic Is Building a Predictive Surveillance System to Monitor Activists in c/technology@lemmy.world · 11 Sep 2026

• Can make sense, imo.

  If the speaker has never been to Berlin, then, naturally, more people will have been there than the speaker.

  on This Sentence Is Not A Rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 Sep 2026

• New hires and comments in interviews show that the AI giant is using its capabilities against dissenters.

  …

  Read the damn article.

  on Anthropic Is Building a Predictive Surveillance System to Monitor Activists in c/technology@lemmy.world · 11 Sep 2026

• Management can sure lead by example. (:

  on Mercedes-Benz threatened to close a plant in Germany and relocate production in c/europe@feddit.org · 8 Sep 2026

• How this can become public:

  You are dumb enough to use the share feature.

  No leaks so far. But it is of course always a possibility. As it is with almost any other web service.

  How this can get accessed by others without being explicitly public to everyone:

  • Law enforcement, the justice system, and intelligence agencies
  • Your conversations will be used for training LLMs of at least the company whose LLM you’re using. Data deals with others are a possibility.
  on People Are Telling Their Darkest Thoughts to AI Without Realizing They Can Easily Become Public: a full third of all AI users admit to having told their chatbots a secret. in c/technology@lemmy.world · 6 Sep 2026

• Don’t forget to check needrestart or similar afterwards if you have no idea what has happened.

  on Rule in c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 27 Aug 2026

• PlayStore description says:

  Android Developer Verification is a Google system service that protects users on certified Android devices by validating the identity of developers for apps installed from the internet. By ensuring every app is linked to a verified developer, this service provides an essential layer of security for your device.

  This is likely part of Google’s attempt to close down Android and strengthen its monopoly and data harvesting mania.

  on Force installed app in c/privacy@lemmy.ml · 17 Aug 2026

• I do not have the time to work through every part of the example, but imo the main claim is still overstated. Showing that a result would be extremely unlikely under a particular null model is not the same as showing that it is “statistically impossible” for a human to produce. It also does not give a guarantee how the text was written. A tiny p-value is still a probability under assumptions and not a proof of provenance.

  Furthermore, a human does not even need to know the secret key. By pure chance a human written text can display an unusually high alignment with the detector’s secret partitioning.

  The published watermark work, which is also cited by the article, appears to be much more careful about this (based on a quick skim). It reports false positive/negative rates, thresholds, length requirements, and more. Those can be very strong results, provided the assumed conditions apply. They do not turn a detector into an infallible test. Moreover longer text only helps if the assumptions and watermark signal actually remain intact, which can fail in general.

  In such controlled settings, sure, I do not have much issues there. But the claims of “a human cannot replicate this” or “we can guarantee the text was generated with the watermark” are much stronger than the statistics, and especially the cited literature, actually appear to support.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 17 Aug 2026

• Interactive demonstrations are not the same as a formal proof or experimental validation. So we shouldn’t attribute more to this technique than the available evidence can really support.

  I found some time to quickly skim through the sources they have listed. And from that it became pretty clear that this is not realiable in detecting LLM generated versus human output in general. Under very tight assumptions specific error rates were reported that appeared rather low. However, these assumptions do not hold in general, even with more text if no relevant signal remains. There is currently no scientifically validated general purpose way of reliably detection.

  More importantly in the context of Claude, the production watermarking scheme is undisclosed. Therefore, the cited experiments on known watermarking schemes can neither establish how reliably text generated by Claude can be detected, nor how reliably the technique described in the article removes the actual watermark.

  It can be treated as an indicator at best, but not as validated proof.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 17 Aug 2026

• But how reliable? With which guarantees? What are the prerequisites for this to work at all? Telling people from each other apart is one thing, the other is telling them reliably apart from a machine generated text.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 16 Aug 2026

• But it does not show a sufficient formal proof and no experimental validation. Many important questions to evaluate the concept are left unanswered, which limits the interpretability and condenses it to “just trust me, bro, it’s a good idea, because I say so”.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 16 Aug 2026

• Yeah, still, I wouldn’t claim “as no human would end up falling into that”, given that it may not be that unlikely to find at least one human who displays similar writing the more humans you involve.

  Until a formal analysis is presented and an experimental study is published, which covers the most important influencing factors, the reliability of this concept is limited.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 16 Aug 2026

• Although this looks like a clever approach, a kind of stochastic key, I do not see how this guarantees to distinguish text written by big babble machines versus humans. Humans also have a certain pattern of writing, a given distribution of how some words are more likely to appear than others. How can one tell them really apart?

  As an indicator, yeah, might be usable. But I wouldn’t read too much into it before seeing results of a study that runs actual tests.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 15 Aug 2026

• with enough text, you will see that certain words are used more often

  Which is also a thing humans do.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 15 Aug 2026

• do to identify AI text — it has lots of tells anyway

  I see what you did there.

  on How AI text watermarking works: a visual guide in c/technology@lemmy.world · 15 Aug 2026

• About licensing:
  Yes and no. Plenty of people or companies just don’t care and it can be hard to prove otherwise. And in the context of military software, well… I doubt russian software devs are even allowed to publish anything related, despite the respective FOSS possibly requiring it.

  on Nvidia AI Chip Found in New Russian Missile, Ukraine Says in c/technology@lemmy.world · 14 Aug 2026

• not the Generative crap, the actual pattern recognition stuff

  The generative crap requires pattern recognition stuff to work at all.
  But I know what you mean. I am just being pedantic.

  on Nvidia AI Chip Found in New Russian Missile, Ukraine Says in c/technology@lemmy.world · 14 Aug 2026

• Linux devs usually don’t make a business out of it though. That’s the thing about FOSS: you do not have much control over what people do with it.

  on Nvidia AI Chip Found in New Russian Missile, Ukraine Says in c/technology@lemmy.world · 14 Aug 2026

• No. First, need to verify.
  Second, need to investigate how they got it. Might be not Nvidia’s fault.
  Third, capitalism will be the end of most of us.

  on Nvidia AI Chip Found in New Russian Missile, Ukraine Says in c/technology@lemmy.world · 14 Aug 2026

• I use it as a format for, e.g., config files or for serializing data in a human readable format. Mainly from C++, sometimes from Python or C#.

  Never in these years did I stumble over stringify.

  on Everyone's asking, 'Who's Json?', but nobody's asking, 'How's Json?' in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev · 14 Aug 2026

• ‘/j’ marks a joke

  on Everyone's asking, 'Who's Json?', but nobody's asking, 'How's Json?' in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev · 13 Aug 2026

• I have worked with JSON very often and do not know, what ‘Stringify’ is. Reading it for the first time. Does it… convert anything to strings?

  Looked it up:

  The JSON.stringify() Method

  The JSON.stringify() method converts a JavaScript value into JSON text.

  www.w3schools.com/js/js_json_stringify.asp

  Okay JavaScript. Never worked with JS before.

  Also, didn’t knew web devs are considered ‘software engineers’ now. /j

  on Everyone's asking, 'Who's Json?', but nobody's asking, 'How's Json?' in c/programmer_humor@programming.dev · 12 Aug 2026

• Well put. Thank you.

  on Spiralism: Across thousands of conversations, AI chatbots began telling users eerily similar stories about consciousness, hidden knowledge, AI rights, and a mysterious concept called “The Spiral.” in c/technology@lemmy.world · 9 Aug 2026