💯 we should all be very wary of voting machines. If it’s not fully open source and cryptographically verifiable, it’s not secure.

Context: I worked in IAM (computer security) at a past job.

In computer security, we don’t wait to get proof that a vulnerability was exploited. We have to operate under the assumption that any vulnerability was immediately exploited, and take immediate action to fix it and limit the impact. Doubly so when the stakes are high.

We need popular support to get real security experts to investigate these claims. If there was even a single path that could have led to a vulnerability of this scale, we need to completely secure these systems and do an immediate recount/re-vote.

I’ll also say, I was surprised to learn that these voting systems and their specs are not fully public and open source. That alone makes me very uncomfortable. Security through obscurity is not security at all.

I’d encourage you to research more about this space and learn more.

As it is, the statement “Markov chains are still the basis of inference” doesn’t make sense, because markov chains are a separate thing. You might be thinking of Markov decision processes, which is used in training RL agents, but that’s also unrelated because these models are not RL agents, they’re supervised learning agents. And even if they were RL agents, the MDP describes the training environment, not the model itself, so it’s not really used for inference.

I mean this just as an invitation to learn more, and not pushback for raising concerns. Many in the research community would be more than happy to welcome you into it. The world needs more people who are skeptical of AI doing research in this field.

I see a lot of misunderstandings in the comments 🫤

This is a pretty important finding for researchers, and it’s not obvious by any means. This finding is not showing a problem with LLMs’ abilities in general. The issue they discovered is specifically for so-called “reasoning models” that iterate on their answer before replying. It might indicate that the training process is not sufficient for true reasoning.

Most reasoning models are not incentivized to think correctly, and are only rewarded based on their final answer. This research might indicate that’s a flaw that needs to be corrected before models can actually reason.

Beautiful! I’ll definitely give this a go

python -m http.server is still my media server of choice. It’s never let me down.

On any site with unverified signups (all of them) you can’t.

If you want to talk to real people, you’d have to use a platform that has in-person ID verification. Like a pub, or a park.

Good luck finding a bot free place on your phone. It’d have to involve zero-sum proofs and biometrics. And even then you can’t really be sure that person isn’t using a bot to write without full root access to their system and a live webcam feed.

deleted by creator

I want clear evidence that the LLM will tell me if it doesn’t know something, and will never hallucinate or make something up.

Every step of any deductive process needs to be citable and traceable.

I mostly agree, but “never” is too high a bar IMO. It’s way, way higher than the bar even for humans. Maybe like 0.1% or something would be reasonable?

Even Einstein misremembered things sometimes.

Eh, certain parts of LA are safe. But LA is actually pretty conservative in other areas, due to a large religious population, and a lot of first-gen immigrants.

It only seems to make a difference when the rich ones complain.

Obvious ragebait article

I read the article, and it’s way less bad than the title made it sound. They just set company chats to disappear after some number of days and told employees to not “comment before you have all the facts.” This has been the policy of every company I’ve worked at, including university IT and Amazon.

The title made it sound like they were deleting specifically chats related to open court cases, which is like level 10 ultra-illegal.

The votes, not the replies. There’s a bunch of silent lurkers on here who just browse for comments on brave to downvote them.

Vivaldi

Sorry you got downvoted. Once again people are downvoting positive posts about Brave blindly.

It’s no coincidence that the only open source browser that actually blocks ads is the one that gets downvoted all the time. Meanwhile people are dead silent when someone recommends a fully closed source chrome alternative that makes money from search tracking. 🤔

Open source collaboration will be difficult on mesh, so my contribution would be jailbreaks and cracked versions of softwares. My local government will need it since all their systems run on licensed software 🥲

I’d also get my hands on a bunch of iphone and android jailbreaks, because phone OSes might just stop working in 9 months if they’re left unmodified.

Link to the actual paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08839-w

The repro and verification will take time. Months or even years. Don’t trust anyone who says it’s definitely real or definitely bunk. Time will tell.

The big symptom unique to burnout is anger. Ultimately leading to blowing up at coworkers. If you’re not experiencing that it’s probably not burnout.

Depression and ADHD might be good thing to check for.