Reminds me of a time I found a serious issue with mailgun. Messaged them, no reply. Had to spam their twitter to get a response. Basically you could have stolen tons of API keys from users without their knowledge and mailgun never disclosed it.
I could have actually gone to their office in person if I wanted to be pedantic but it actually seemed like a pretty weird office space lol.
I don't think disclosure of reported security issues is really a norm, unless the firm finds evidence the bug was exploited (by someone other than the reporter). It's a good thing to do, but I think the majority of stuff that gets reported everywhere is never disclosed --- with the major and obvious exception of consumer or commercial software that needs to be updated "on prem".
The problem I have with it is that there's no way they could have determined if an API key was stolen or not, even to this day.
Basically, their docs (which seemed auto-generated) pointed to a domain they did not own (verified this). So if you ran any API examples you sent your keys to a 3rd party. I know because I did this. There's no way to know that the domain in the docs is simply wrong.
I tried explaining this to the support people, that I needed to talk with a software engineer but they kept stonewalling. I think it was fixed after 24 hours or so.
I'm right between GenZ and Millennial. There is something crazy going on with GenZ IMO. It is like pulling teeth to go out and do anything with GenZ friends. Maybe my millennial friends are more bored so its easier to do stuff but it just blows my mind. I hate to get all "phone bad" but it seems scrolling and doing absolutely nothing is the default setting for so many people. I feel like this stuff certainly won't make it any better.
I'm also between GenZ and Millennial. I don't have many (any?) GenZ friends, but I feel like I say "no" to social events the most out of my peers (and have for a while). I frankly don't know how to juggle it all: between maintaining important relationships (two partners, calling family regularly, keeping up with close friends), household stuff (cooking, cleaning, laundry, administrative overhead), exercise/my own hobbies (going to the gym once a week), I feel like I barely have time to do... Anything, let alone have downtime to myself.
I have (single) peers and friends who maintain wall-to-wall social calendars, so I've assumed for a while that the difference is just the amount of engagement multiple romantic entanglements takes, but maybe I'm missing something.
I'd love to "do nothing" much more than I can (read a book, work on a project, tidy my basement, learn a new skill...)
You'd be _very_ surprised. This isn't reddit so I probably don't have to write a disclaimer about generalizations... but just in case, I'm speaking in general terms.
Just look at who buys/consumes most written romance. Overwhelmingly women. Now, a super simple AI that just says what you want to hear is different from long-form romance novels... but I think we could see something approaching 50/50.
I personally can't see the appeal. It seems like a fun toy for a bit. Super impressive stuff but the idea of treating it like a human is a bit depressing to me.
>I personally can't see the appeal. It seems like a fun toy for a bit. Super impressive stuff but the idea of treating it like a human is a bit depressing to me.
I wouldn't mind chatbot trained on Kant's or Hegel's work and asking Hegel for example what he thinks of some modern day issue. I know character.ai has historical characters as chatbots but they seem like toys(I agree with you on that) and they do not cite historical sources.
I think the only problem would be we truly don't know if that is what a figure would think. I can't imagine how many people would invoke the "George Washington's AI agrees with me" lol
you'd be surprised on how deranged some people are, no matter the sexes. Having a Prince Charming / Manic Pixie Dream Girl that always agree with you will be the utopia for them, and amplifying their mental issues. Soon they'll have their world view warped and that not even considering bad actors. If politically, criminally or economically motive is poisoning the model, they'll be very vulnerable.
>you'd be surprised on how deranged some people are, no matter the sexes. Having a Prince Charming / Manic Pixie Dream Girl that always agree with you will be the utopia for them, and amplifying their mental issues.
Isn't social media already doing that and niche internet communities? People call it echo chambers.
Thankfully I don't know of any of these types first hand, but I totally believe you.
I tried it the "companion" and it was a fantastic work of technology but the idea that there is _nothing_ behind the screen just makes me not really care to use it for "companionship."
funny thing was he had other places on his linkedin under "active employment" but we never really dug into it (until we learned he was full-time there) because he just seemed like the kind of person who wouldn't keep his LinkedIn up to date.
I'm no longer job searching but every interview involved multiple steps and "background checks."
I'm seeing the dude's resume has him working half a dozen jobs in a year which even to me is a huge red flag. Then he has a github with automated commits... I don't want to be disparaging to start ups because its brutal out there but how does someone like that have such a high success rate? Is he taking a super low salary or something?
On Twitter some of the founders discussed this. He would give references to people who answered the phone and then praised his work generically. One person said they thought it was strange that both of his reference checks seemed like really young guys, but it's the startup world so they overlooked it.
There was one Tweet from someone who said they did a reference check from someone who said he did good work when he was working, but he was working multiple jobs at the same time so he wasn't working much. Maybe he assumed his references wouldn't be checked often, and maybe he was right?
To add to this. It would be great to see which companies he interviewed at but didn't get the job. Would argue those companies have better BS-detectors conducting the interviews.
For my last job — the guy who was supposed to verify my permanent address called me and asked me to ask someone in my village to take a photo of the house with same day newspaper in the view and send it to him. I forwarded the request to my future employer asking whether it was the normal verification procedure :-)
Unicorns are easier to find than newspapers. If you threaten to shoot me unless I bring newspaper - I am not even sure where they sell them anymore in my city.
Last time I was in New York City I could not for the life of me find a paper copy of the New York Times to read. Newsstands appear to just be selling candy and drinks.
You can get the New York Times and other newspapers in airports still. I do still buy a newspaper before a flight sometimes, but I actually shouldn't because flights have WiFi now.
Yes - I know you can get them in airports (lounges often give them out for free) - I just thought it a little bizarre that I couldn't find a copy of the New York Times in midtown Manhattan!
Background checks come in different varieties, usually it's criminal and global watchlist checks. Employment and education check is couple $$ extra for the employer, and some employers really don't mind.
It’s also possible to “freeze” your employment history report just like you can freeze your credit report. Which prevents even companies with the wherewithal to do an employment history check from getting that information.
Wow... that's really tragic. It certainly makes sense though. I was shocked at how many people thought there was something suspicious or that police were lying.
When a couple that old live alone, if one of them goes the other is usually on their own. Makes total sense.
> Elon Musk Accused of Doxxing After Reposting Judge John McConnell’s Daughter’s Job on X
For re-posting a post that has a screenshot of a public linkedin profile?
I'm not a fan of trying to ruin lives over petty political disputes but this is hardly "doxxing." Does that word even mean anything anymore? Just the other week people were saying the "DOGE kids" were "doxxed" and it was the same thing. Posting a public linkedin profile.
Does the linked in profile mean "can't be doxed because you're otherwise online" or something?
That doesn't make sense to me. This person who is otherwise unknown and uninvolved in a court case is now subject to the typical internet rabble, that seems like some type of doxing.
The dictionary definition is: search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the internet, typically with malicious intent.
A linkedin profile is not private. Ironically, its very public. The entire point of a linkedin profile is to have your professional information public.
My definition of doxxing is more or less the dictionary definition. If you're going really far out of your way to find information on profiles that are otherwise private, with the goal of tearing someone down, that is doxxing. Maybe you could make a case that there is "just" doxxing, like finding the profile of an animal abuser... but in almost all cases, its just people being malicious.
I don't think publishing that a judge's daughter works at XYZ is doxxing. That has been a thing _long_ before the internet. The CEO's daughter is XYZ's wife. The politician's son is on the board of ABC co., etc.
Private "or identifying information" that seems to fit to me...
The idea that if any info about an individual is on the internet, they have a linked in profile or such, that they can't be doxed I don't think makes any sense.
> Private "or identifying information" that seems to fit to me...
I don't see how, honestly. That would make for an incredibly loose and meaningless definition. If I post "Donald J. Trump lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500", is that doxxing? Its identifying information.
We could get into semantics but at the end of the day, doxxing shouldn't be something treated lightly. If we start considering too many things as doxxing, nobody will take it seriously.
"or identifying information" - so it's doxxing by the very definition you quoted?
Why do people excuse this sort of behaviour? What explanation says it's ok for Musk to involve anyone's child in such a way? Never mind in a way that discredits the USAs claim to have checks and balances across 3 branches of government.
Don't forget the daughter's financial disclosure form, but the daughter's specific occupation as a "senior policy advisor" in the Department of Education might require her financial disclosures to be public [1].
> Public disclosure is required of "senior officials in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government to ... [report] their finances as well as other interests outside the Government."
"Official" is kind of a big deal. Are policy advisors (as opposed to people who can both write policy and vote on passing it) considered officials?
It is dubious to use the term doxxing to describe this judge's daughter's situation, but Elon Musk has a hypocritical attitude toward the posting of public LinkedIn profiles (in the case of the DOGE "kids") and already-public information about a private jet.
I'd understand selling if you feel a company will under perform, but to sell because of "governance" is just silly. I would wager there is no company that would truly meet their "governance" standards if they looked into them. META is up over 100% YTD and GOOG has slightly outperformed SP500 YTD.
I could have actually gone to their office in person if I wanted to be pedantic but it actually seemed like a pretty weird office space lol.