SnoopSqueak
@SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
I was abused by my christian parents.
I would like to live long enough to see humanity mature out of superstition and free the world from human greed.
- Comment on How did Google discover public links of Claude chats? 1 day ago:
Yeah, they probably don’t. But public search engines typically do.
It is very, very difficult to keep anything private these days.
- Comment on Britons greatly overestimate number of sex crimes committed by foreign nationals 3 days ago:
with functional immigration rules one can expect nicer people to be let in and bad people are forbidden to enter.
How do you propose we determine who will commit a crime before letting them in? Why do locals get a pass to you for committing the same crimes at similar rates as foreigners?
I think someone is misdirecting your anger to the wrong targets. Most immigrants do not want to harm you. Billionaires, on the other hand, love it when we harm each other instead of them. They don’t want to lose their wealth, their power; they want to widen the gap even more. They want to control us through fearmongering and deception.
- Comment on Firts comment in first google result about bug - some jerk correcting topic starter 3 days ago:
I just wanted to play damn game. On my damn computer. But no, I got a bug to deal with and first spotted comment is from some unhinged dev.
We don’t see enough in the screenshot to feel your outrage. If you mentioned wanting to play a game, it seems reasonable for them to ask for clarification whether your computer is completely unusable or has some functionality.
I don’t think they were trying to correct you, I think they were trying to help you troubleshoot by getting more details about the issue. I could be wrong.
How do you think I feel and how willing I to provide any help with debugging?
I understand the disappointment and frustration. Unfortunately, no one can diagnose your problems from a distance without your cooperation.
I hope you are able to resolve the problem and enjoy your game. I’ve lost my shit for less, and it can be easy to lash out, even at people who are genuinely trying to help us.
- Comment on How did Google discover public links of Claude chats? 3 days ago:
Yes, Anthropic presumably submitted a request to block search results that lead to Claude chats, as well as to remove the ones that were already there. Google’s removal tool can remove results that had been indexed, and the “noindex” meta tag prevents future indexing, if I’m understanding correctly.
support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9689846?hl=e…
does google still has the URLs that it has already scraped?
My guess would be yes. I doubt the removal tool actually deletes content, more likely it just deactivates it. It could theoretically be reactived or used for something else, possibly even inbreeding (AI chat logs to train AI on) or selling data to whoever pays for it. But that is just a guess, I could be wrong. I don’t have much optimism when it comes to corporations, they tend to be as evil as they can get away with. If they legally acquired the content from those links because Anthropic neglected to protect them, there may not be many limits to what Google can do with those chat logs.
- Comment on How did Google discover public links of Claude chats? 3 days ago:
Claude fucked up, and gave Google a way to index public links of people.
Anthropic fucked up, Claude is not a person.
After this news broke, they asked Google (and other search engines) to not show those urls anymore.
Correct, that seems to be the case.
People fucked up and/or fell victim to Google’s the data hunger, which let Google to index their public links
Kind of. The user fuck up would be not realizing that Anthropic had no protections from search engines, and that by clicking “share” they were creating publicly accessible links.
after which Claude asked Google not to index such links.
Anthropic seems to have updated the domain those links are generated on so that crawlers do not index public chats, yes.
I guess, in the end, I’m mostly wondering if the long random strings of public links are generally “brute-force-discovered” by crawlers like Google, or whether “discovery” of such links requires some kind of breach.
I am also curious. I looked it up. developers.google.com/search/…/how-search-works
The first stage is finding out what pages exist on the web. There isn’t a central registry of all web pages, so Google must constantly look for new and updated pages and add them to its list of known pages. This process is called “URL discovery”. Some pages are known because Google has already visited them. Other pages are discovered when Google extracts a link from a known page to a new page: for example, a hub page, such as a category page, links to a new blog post.
If I had to guess based on this, Google had probably indexed the domain Claude or its frontend run on and automatically scooped up the public chats as they became available.
It is also possible that any Claude chat shared will still be accessible to web crawlers, if they just ignore the flags telling them not to scrape, crawl, access, index, etc.
- Comment on How did Google discover public links of Claude chats? 3 days ago:
Did these people publish the urls somewhere publically themselves?
They created a public link. Google scraped it because it wasn’t told not to.
From the article:
A spokesman for Google made clear to the BBC that the company does not control “what pages are made public on the web,” saying instead that action comes from websites.
“We give site owners clear controls to decide whether pages can be crawled or indexed, and we always respect those directives.”
As the search indexing of the chat logs is no longer occurring, it is likely Anthropic used available tools to quickly block the chat log links from search results. Google’s process for a website owner to block a link is straightforward, but must be initiated by a website owner.
Google was not the only one:
Other search engines like Bing, Brave and Duck Duck Go, through which the Claude chat logs also appeared, were approached for comment.
- Comment on How come president try for goals into the future, when its a big if? Like carbon emissions and such. Why not do comprehensive plans that can be done in 4 years instead the far off future? 4 days ago:
Well, unless your base has been conditioned to accept whatever you say instead of paying attention to reality. Then you can completely contradict yourself and still get support, somehow.
www.bbc.com/news/articles/crlx8w5wdl0o
“When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on day one.” Aug 2024
“They’re dying, Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done - I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” May 2023
- Comment on is it weird to have your own religious beliefs system 1 week ago:
The trinity was invented to avoid accusations of polytheism, but as usual with religious apologetics it just adds more confusion.
Jesus, god, and the holy spirit must all be one, otherwise the religion is not monotheistic.
But if they are all one, why ever distinguish between them?
So believers arbitrarily assign different roles to their three different gods while pretending it’s all the same guy. God is immune to logic, and many christians dare not question their own salvation. It is moral and intellectual cowardice, and it is killing us all.
- Comment on is it weird to have your own religious beliefs system 1 week ago:
Yeah. The bible is literally unbelievable, it contradicts itself. Every “believer” has their own headcanon.
- Comment on Would an LLM AI model trained wholly on consenting open source projects with a license requiring all derivative works be open source licensed still be problematic? 1 week ago:
With all due respect I’m not really sure your feelings on what constitutes humanlike matters much.
Fuck you too, shitbag.
- Comment on Would an LLM AI model trained wholly on consenting open source projects with a license requiring all derivative works be open source licensed still be problematic? 1 week ago:
It is not a thinking machine. But it is advertised as an agent, a personal companion, etc. Companies take turns releasing “rogue” AI to fool people into believing it can think for itself.
- Comment on Would an LLM AI model trained wholly on consenting open source projects with a license requiring all derivative works be open source licensed still be problematic? 1 week ago:
We have LLMs. We do not have artificial intelligence. They call it that, but it’s all marketing. It’s not remotely humanlike.
- Comment on Would an LLM AI model trained wholly on consenting open source projects with a license requiring all derivative works be open source licensed still be problematic? 1 week ago:
Dumb fuck.
You want to know the difference?
We have writing. We have machines. We have computers.
We do not have AI.
You are dangerously stupid.
- Comment on Would an LLM AI model trained wholly on consenting open source projects with a license requiring all derivative works be open source licensed still be problematic? 1 week ago:
“AI” is more of a scam than a tool.
We do not yet have artificial intelligence. At all. They only call it that to scam idiots.
- Comment on Would an LLM AI model trained wholly on consenting open source projects with a license requiring all derivative works be open source licensed still be problematic? 1 week ago:
“I put millions of lines of code in a blender and kept re-rolling the output until I got something that kind of does what I want it to” will always be less efficient and more error-prone than a competent dev or team building with specific intent.
People who can’t tell the difference approve bloated code with myriad vulnerabilities. Often, AI output doesn’t actually do what it pretends to do.
If you’ve worked in any IT project, you will remember the most common issues: unclear requirements, scope creep, silos or misaligned incentives.
For AI projects, you can add to the list: “We’re not even sure this thing works the same way every time” and you’ve got a perfect storm for failure.
towardsdatascience.com/why-ai-projects-fail/
An annoying trend I’ve noticed in articles like this is that they still insist the AI is not to blame. Phrases like “devs love the technology,” fuck no I don’t. Or “95% of AI projects fail, but yours will totally succeed if you do it right”. It feels exactly like how the lottery exploits people’s hopes.
The steps required to make AI function are too costly to make AI worthwhile in almost every case. It was a stupid scam that too many companies fell for.
- Comment on Why put data centers in space? 1 week ago:
Another psycho christian who thinks eternal punishment is somehow loving.
Fuck off, death cultist.
- Comment on Why are people so rude on Reddit compared to the Fediverse? 2 weeks ago:
No, dipshit. I’m appealing to reason, not authority. Science is a process. Atheism is a lack of belief in unbelievable claims.
Your death cult is the one asserting to know things that cannot be known. You are the one lying and pretending it is true.
- Comment on Why is society at large okay with euthanasia for pets but not for humans? 2 weeks ago:
If you’re actually sorry, stop spreading the brainrot.
There is no correct interpretation of the bible, it contradicts itself. By normalizing lying, you enable situations like the tragedy described above.
And my friends’ suicides. Your death cult’s body count rises each day. They’re not in heaven. We will never meet again. You sell false hope at the expense of real life.
Fuck you for choosing death.
- Comment on Why are people so rude on Reddit compared to the Fediverse? 2 weeks ago:
Truly progressive people don’t give a shit about church doctrine. Arbitrary authority and death cults belong in the past. Magic isn’t real. Stop holding us back. Stop killing us.
- Comment on What's the thing you're supposed to be doing right now instead of scrolling? 3 weeks ago:
Nah, just take one when you get the job. Then never again. For luck. 😉
- Comment on What's the thing you're supposed to be doing right now instead of scrolling? 3 weeks ago:
I was late on my first day for the same reason. 🙃 But I soon realized my mistake and worked with them for a couple of years before moving on to something else.
- Comment on Would somebody like Stephen Colbert be just as good if he or she was being sarcastic to the left? 3 weeks ago:
Yeah. The right is an audience that enjoys shit like Jeff Dunham. Less clever satire, more “HUHUHUH THE RACIST PUPPET SAID A RACIST THING I AGREE WITH UNIRONICALLY”
- Comment on Stop Talking To Me, Google Search 3 weeks ago:
But there are better choices.
- Comment on What's the thing you're supposed to be doing right now instead of scrolling? 3 weeks ago:
Also, I’m no longer in my underwear.
I was nervous about the phone interview (no video) for my first job, so I took a shower before it started. But I didn’t realize we were in different time zones, so the call came an hour sooner than I expected. I did the interview with a towel wrapped around me. I got the job.
- Comment on Stop Talking To Me, Google Search 3 weeks ago:
Why are you still using google?
- Comment on Republicans head home for the summer after a string of losses in Congress 3 weeks ago:
You were probably being rhetorical, but it does make sense, in a way that should provoke revolution. Rich people are paying to make everything worse. The self-serving and shortsighted are happily helping them do it.
- Comment on Why do some people identify with a political party even if many of their views don't align with that party's platform? 3 weeks ago:
Lack of integrity, inconsistent or non-existent values. They just do whatever works for them at the time. My parents are the same way.
- Comment on Why do some people identify with a political party even if many of their views don't align with that party's platform? 3 weeks ago:
They are falling for the lies.
Republicans lie that they are pro-life, but really they are pro-birth. If the babies don’t grow up christian, they are worthless. They don’t care about all life, they care about life that serves them. They view children as disposable and they simply have more to replace those they’ve lost. It’s unacceptable.
- Comment on Centrist Democrats Rebuke Party’s Left Wing: ‘We Are Capitalist, Not Socialist’ 3 weeks ago:
I agree that people don’t need religion to be bad.
But also, the more excuses we remove, the fewer places they have to hide.
Religion is not just aesthetic window dressing. It is often the willful embracing of things that cannot be measured, including deadly falsehoods.
My main issue with religion is that there is no consistent standard.
- Comment on How do I become more "woke"? Just to aggervate the right a little. 3 weeks ago:
Nice. I think many of humanity’s problems could be solved with more effective communication. Some people act like we don’t live in the same world, which makes it very difficult to hold each other accountable for our choices.
Thank you for the pleasant interaction. I hope you also have a nice weekend. 🙂