All good pinball players tilt. Owners can make the machine "loose" or "tight" (at least that what we used to call it.) A loose machine allows a lot of tilting, and a tight one only allows slight nudges.
If the ball is coming straight down the middle, there's no choice but to tilt. A really good player will be able to tilt the tightest machine enough to get that ball to a flipper. Also, a really good player is better at judging "straight down the middle" and choosing not to tilt at all. Anybody who is reasonable at pinball can play for an infinite amount of time on a very loose machine.
It's not actually a factor that can be removed from pinball. You can't have machines tilting when people just lean against them, or when a player pushes a flipper button energetically. The owner has to pick some threshold. They're irredeemably physical games.
If Claude looks at the code when it does it, then you can still sue them. I don't think there's a "Claude Clean Room" product that trains on everything except the code you might be accused of copying.
I can't just translate Harry Potter to Spanish and sell it.
Free Software was designed to avoid this, and has become stricter as the technology changed. Open Source was deliberately designed to thwart this. The entire intention of it was to allow businesses to resell work that was done for free. When you fork Free Software, your fork is also Free Software.
I don't mind criminals being punished. This person wasn't convicted of anything, yet was still punished. This isn't criminal punishment, this is just injustice. It's also the norm, pretty much everywhere.
It's an obvious deficit in civilization itself that we can't have, or even seem to come up with, a principled justice system. We just intermittently ban specific atrocities and hope that eventually adds up to justice.
> In the US, it's seen as a God-given truth that no innocent person should ever be punished.
In the US, just as in Japan, as soon as you are arrested they begin punishing you. If there were a real assumption of innocence, jail would be pleasant and comfortable, and if you were WFH you wouldn't miss a day. There is a material presumption of guilt, even if there's some sort of ethereal theoretical presumption of innocence.
Instead, you're in a horrible cell, eating horrible food, dressed in a humiliating way, treated in a humiliating way, and exposed to dangerous people. Unless you can pay a bond which you will never get back (because you are too poor to pay bail.) You haven't been convicted of anything. The fine you're facing might be lower than your bond, and the time you're facing might be shorter than the time you'd have to wait in jail to go to court.
>if there were a real assumption of innocence, jail would be pleasant and comfortable, and if you were WFH you wouldn't miss a day.
At some point, you have to hold the person and figure out if they're a danger or not. Not everything is an unpaid ticket, and jail is probably unpleasant because everyone involved is unpleasant. Has it ever been otherwise?
>pay a bond which you will never get back (because you are too poor to pay bail.)
Why would you not get your bond back if you went to court as required? It would be forfeit if someone stops showing up to hearings, which is a requirement of their bond. It's to get them to return to court instead of just fleeing.
> They dismiss the case because it's not worth the time.
I don't know what this means in the context of the US justice system. They're not paid on commission. They're being paid to be there no matter what happens.
They dismiss the case because the cop didn't bother to show up, or they didn't have any evidence against your defense. The reason you (as the person who got ticketed) don't show up to court is because you know you have nothing to say, or because it's not worth it to you when getting out of the ticket isn't enough pay for 3-4 hours of your time. The only reason you do show up is because you think you have a defense.
If you can't make bail, you're showing up no matter how stupid the charge is.
edit: I have personal experience (from a few decades ago) of being forced to face stupid charges. It was a game. They inflated the potential sentence to 3-5 years through silly charges designed for just that, and offered me a plea bargain of no time, no fine, and expungement from my record in 6 months. I pled guilty. If I hadn't been bailed out, I would have had to wait two weeks in jail for that moronic, depressing event. I pled guilty because it was easy to do, even if I hadn't done anything. If I had sat in jail for two weeks, I might have pled guilty even if it involved a week of jail time and a fine, just to get out.
Kalief Browder spent almost 3 years in Riker's Island awaiting trial just to have the charges dropped. People on here told me that showed that the justice system worked. I said that his life was destroyed by this, and he would probably end up dead soon. I got downvoted furiously. He'd killed himself 2 years later.
Large Criminal Justice systems like NYC have a large population and it's easy to end up being thrown in a cell and forgotten. Having a lawyer or not is the biggest difference in outcomes. I sat in on a lot of court cases in Philly when dealing with a case. Saw 17 year olds locked up with no lawyer over a simple drug case while a guy caught dealing pounds hired a lawyer and got off with nothing after completing a "rehab" program. Guy didn't even use.
Dropping legitimate cases due to priorities and resources doesn't mean that they don't also still often pursue illegitimate cases beyond the point of reason.
> Mass surveillance, of course, isn’t what the delegation is proposing. The fear isn’t that a French investigator will read every WhatsApp message.
French investigators won't care about every WhatsApp message. But they definitely will slurp them all up, process them all with AI, and read them whenever they have an interest. And they will deny they are doing this as they do this.
It'd be interesting (horrifying?) to see something that was once assumed secret go public. Imagine if all chats and payments eventually went public at some point... the Transparity, when nothing can be encrypted anymore so no one tries. Mankind becomes a unit - or it devolves?
With TON, perhaps altcoins will give way to micro coins - tailored especially for apps and their users/founders? ..for micropayments and running on AI infrastructure. Blockchain and AI infrastructure are already interchangeable in large part. So if transaction histories are exposed, the damage is limited. Startups won't look to IPO, they'll look to float a coin to make serious money. Binance did it. Polymarket next? Poly is dominated by Bitcoin as it stands.
I'm not sure if Ethereum tokens would be the same thing.
I don't think this makes any sense. I can see that long delays in public reporting might not be good for the near future, but a year from now all of the easily found stuff will have been found. At some point, everything will have hardened to a certain extent, new things will get scanned before they hit the streets, and the only bugs being found will rely a lot more on somebody's insight than the LLM used to test that insight.
I think people are getting overly impressed/intimidated by tons of bugs being found by LLMs in a bunch of code that hasn't been looked at by more than a couple of people in years, or even at all since it was written. Those are going to run out. There won't be any code left that hasn't recently been looked over by an LLM.
I think this assumes software is a static target (Which it is not) . We are not just using LLMs to scan old code developers are using LLMs (like Copilot and others) to write new code and they are doing it by the shovel-load. The pace of shipping has gone up which means the pace of introducing new bugs has gone up right alongside it. The bug pool does not empty out because we keep refilling it every sprint.
Plus, the definition of the "easily found stuff" is a moving target. The AI models aren't static either. What takes a human reverse-engineer a week of deep insight today might just be a standard automated API call by 2027.
So while I would love for the dust to settle in a year, I think we are just looking at the new normal.
Thanks for reading the post and for the great counter-point!
That makes sense to me, but in a world where code is generated by the shovel-load (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48073680) could the pace of introducing bugs not match or exceed the rate of finding them indefinitely?
reply