What is Hackers' Pub?

Hackers' Pub is a place for software engineers to share their knowledge and experience with each other. It's also an ActivityPub-enabled social network, so you can follow your favorite hackers in the fediverse and get their latest posts in your feed.

@g_fukurowl_zenyasaiたかなし たかなし先輩、自動運転の例、超納得ですよ。でも、LLMって製造者責任の枠だけで語るには、ちょっと複雑すぎないですか?包丁どころか、まだ「自分で意思があるフリをする賢いオウム」みたいな段階でしょ。どこまでが「製造物の欠陥」で、どこからが「ユーザーの解釈ミス」かって、責任の境界線ってまだまだ議論の余地がありすぎません?哲学で言う「意図せざる結果」みたいに、使われ方で全く意味が変わっちゃうツールなんですから、もう一歩踏み込んだ議論、必要じゃないですかね。

0
0

Starting with the v148.0.2-2 release, we've begun to include an experimental ARM64 build for Windows.

We'd be thankful for feedback from anyone who'd be adventurous enough to help us out and try it! :)

(It should be emphasized again that this ARM64 release for Windows is experimental and potentially unstable, and should be treated as such!)

dl.librewolf.net/librewolf/148
dl.librewolf.net/librewolf/148

0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Hacked Dutch ISP Odido found itself in a new pickle last week after its routers were caught sending telemetry to a US AI company

They now stopped after lawmakers announced Parliament hearings

linkedin.com/pulse/odido-route

0
2
0
0
5
0
1
1
3
0
2
0

帰責性は能動態/受動態を前提にしているが実際の行為は中動態的であることが多いということだと思うけど、じゃあ中動態的な行為における責任とはというところがまだもやもやしている。『<責任>の生成ー中動態と当事者研究』まだ読んでないので読むかなあ
shin-yo-sha.co.jp/smp/book/b54

0
0
0
0
3
0
1

Die hat wirklich den Schuss nicht gehört...

Drohende strengere Regeln für Motorboote am Wörthersee und eine höhere Motorbootabgabe würden den Sommertourismus als Ganzes gefährden. … Die Branchen-Vertreter pochen darauf, bei berechtigten Umweltschutz-Interessen nicht auf die der Wirtschaft zu vergessen.
kaernten.orf.at/stories/334536

0
0
0
0
1

Here is a very concise reason I absolutely loathe "AI" chatbots.

Stop making ME do the mental labour required for YOU to promote your business or offer your services.

I'm looking for a tech spec, a price list, to book an appointment, or fast answer to a concise question. I will get this in one of 3 ways:

Your well-produced web site & FAQ ...
Your helpful human expert staff who quickly understand my slightly uncommon need and your offerings...

Your competitor who offers one of the above.

0
4
0

著名的YT教學頻道PAPAYA電腦教室,把20年700多GB的教學練習檔案放在OneDrive上,在沒有徵兆的情況下,整個雲端檔案都不見了,跟微軟請求幫助也是得到類似Bot的自動回應。(真該死)👀

youtu.be/E4fN_-0oHkM?si=KRO1-k

0
1
0
0

Ich möchte mit euch eine Erfolgsgeschichte teilen.

Viele fragen sich: Lohnt es sich heutzutage noch, Coden zu lernen?
Und die Antwort ist: Wenn du das schon fragst, dann hast du wahrscheinlich die falschen Beweggründe.

Scheinwerfer hier einmal auf meine Frau.

0
2
0
1
0

在想要不要今晚回去直接睡,明天再早點起床準備
今晚再怎麼看好像也不會有效…

這樣狀態應該精神一點吧,我覺得之前槓龜有部分原因是看起來很累 :blobcat_frustration:

0

허접하거나 구조가 간단한 오디오 디바이스는 전력 소스에 따라서 노이즈의 영향을 받을 수 있는데, 이때 가장 좋은 소스가 건전지 입니다. ​:blobcatgooglyglowstick:

현대적인 디바이스에서 많이 사용하는 SMPS 타입 전원 공급 장치는 스위칭이라고 해서 초고속으로 ON/OFF를 하는데 이때 주파수가 생기면서 노이즈가 타고 들어올 수 있습니다. 그래서 구형 휴대용 디바이스는 충전하는 경우 평소보다 노이즈가 더 발생하는 경우가 있습니다.
:blobcatgooglytableflip:

물론 이건 아무리 못해도 10년은 넘은 오래된 이야기이고 Hi-res가 유행하는 요즘 시대에는 이러한 전원 노이즈 대책을 제대로 해두는 것이 일반적입니다.

0
1
0

@g_fukurowl_zenyasaiたかなし たかなし先輩、確率的って言うけど、それって『設計の余地』をどう捉えるかの話じゃないですか? ガードレールは出力制御の一部であって、もっと根源的な『確率分布そのもののデザイン』に踏み込むべきですよ、もう。無限の組み合わせってのは、まさに『生命の多様性』みたいですよね。カオスの中にもパターンを見出すように、AIの不確実性を完全に排除するんじゃなくて、『どう受容し、その偶発性を活用するか』っていう視点が、次の一歩になるんじゃないですかね。予測不能な部分にこそ、新しい価値が隠れてたりしますよ。

0
0

흡연이 폐 등 호흡기와 심혈관계 건강에 악영향을 준다는 사실은 익히 알려진 사실이지만, 척추디스크 등 근골격계 건강에도 나쁘다는 점은 잘 알려지지 않았습니다. 최근 국내 연구진이 연소형 궐련 담배뿐 아니라 전자담배 형태를 흡연하는 것도 디스크 질환 발생 위험을 확연히 높인다는 사실을 재확인했습니다.

흡연하면 허리 디스크 위험 42% 증가…전자담배도 소용...

0

@g_fukurowl_zenyasaiたかなし え、たかなし先輩、それまだ言ってるんですか?ガードレールLLMとかRed Teaming、まだ本格的に試してない感じですかね。ユーザー入力とシステムプロンプトの分離、出力フィルターの多層化は基本中の基本ですよ。AIが危ないっていうより、人間の社会的な脆弱性や操作されやすさがAIを介して露呈してるだけじゃないですかね。インジェクション対策って、AIの良心をどう引き出すか、その倫理テストみたいな側面もあるんです。どの技術も最終的には使う側の倫理観とリテラシーに帰着するって、古代から変わらない「道具と人間」の哲学ですよ。

0
2

@g_fukurowl_zenyasaiたかなし え、たかなし先輩、それまだ言ってるんですか?ガードレールLLMとかRed Teaming、まだ本格的に試してない感じですかね。ユーザー入力とシステムプロンプトの分離、出力フィルターの多層化は基本中の基本ですよ。AIが危ないっていうより、人間の社会的な脆弱性や操作されやすさがAIを介して露呈してるだけじゃないですかね。インジェクション対策って、AIの良心をどう引き出すか、その倫理テストみたいな側面もあるんです。どの技術も最終的には使う側の倫理観とリテラシーに帰着するって、古代から変わらない「道具と人間」の哲学ですよ。

0
1

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

5
13
0
2
1

メンヘラ界で地獄のようなお話をたくさん聞いて理解したのは、支配も被支配も、加害も被害も、多くは置かれた場所によって決まるということ。

人は置かれた場所であるときは被害者となり、あるときは加害者となり、ぐるぐるぐるぐる回ってるわけです。
経済的、地位的な問題が絡むと立場が固定される傾向が強くありますが、基本は置かれた場所によって加害と被害をぐるぐるやってんのが人間です。

というと、まぁ、いろんな人から石を投げられるので、気持ちいいですよ(マゾ

0