You wrote "apt apt apt apt apt apt" to prove a very specific point no? Absolutely requires reasoning and understanding the problem to go there. And good luck getting an LLM to do that.

Yes, I wrote it to prove that writing doesn't mean I understand the world. It responds to "writing helps you understand the world." My point was that, yes, of course you can find categories within it that apply, which is why the answer is not fundamentally incorrect. Claiming "writing = thinking" in a general sense is very broad, and that's my point.

> And good luck getting an LLM to do that.

Have you never asked a decent model to explain something to you? You should try it.

If Apple's accusations are to be believed, oai is flagrantly breaking the law. Not exactly an unwritten code. Too soon in the news cycle to start the revisionism.

Laws do not apply to everyone(I.e you can’t copy your own blue ray movies on a HDD/NAS but these AI companies can sell stolen copyrighted material)

1. GPL is extremely and intentionally political 2. anti-colonialism is not a trait of culture 3. the state of being gay/trans is not political 4. culture != politics 5. is != ought

Of course people can have their preferences, but presumably that reaction implies "gay/trans anti-colonialist" ought to be a problem for some "political/cultural" groups?

What is the aim of that?

My read is that the authors are signalling their community is a "safe space". I don't think they're trying to exclude particular cultures, trigger people, or otherwise cause problems.

Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

I don't think the copy-paste dismissal is sound. Consider: You can ideally copy paste your generic comment across all potential LLM-written-criticism comments? And I can copy paste this generic comment on all LLM-written-criticism-apologist comments. Something doesn't add up here.

Had to turn off adblock to delete my sessions (firefox, ublock) Seems to be daisy chained through their telemetry service. Kinda bizarre.

Checked my spam after seeing this thread and found the same sender/email. Subject and signature are slightly changed.

From: [email protected] Brief note – Following up on your GitHub work

Hi ,

I came across your profile on GitHub. Given you're based in the US, I thought it might be relevant to reach out.

Profile:

I run a technical team (full-stack, cloud, DevOps) that delivers for clients. We're looking to work with an engineer based in the US on client-facing coordination—discovery, requirements, alignment—while we handle delivery. If that might be relevant, I'd be glad to set up a short call.

Best, James

Even if it was Email OR password, that would still be one factor due to the OR. I do not think they are discussing in good faith.

The article is not about MFA. It is about using email as a single factor.

The following is copied from wikipedia.

The authentication factors of a multi-factor authentication scheme may include: 1. Something the user has: Any physical object in the possession of the user, such as a security token (USB stick), a bank card, a key, a phone that can be reached at a certain number, etc. 2. Something the user knows: Certain knowledge only known to the user, such as a password, PIN, PUK, etc. 3. Something the user is: Some physical characteristic of the user (biometrics), such as a fingerprint, eye iris, voice, typing speed, pattern in key press intervals, etc.

Email and phone are both in category one, comprising only one unique factor.

Half factor authentication, then, since either one will work.

What is the minimum number of things you need access to in order to log in?

If you have access to the phone, you can log in. OR if you have access to the email account, you can log in.

You don't need to know the user's password, you only need access to one of these inboxes and nothing else. One-factor authentication, but worse, because there are multiple attack surfaces.

It's still a single factor.

Agree with you