Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | hashiyakshmi's commentslogin

You're able to disable the pin feature to prevent that data from being saved though, so it definitely isn't a requirement.

I'm also not sure where you've read that they collect the contents of messages, because as far as I'm aware they still aren't doing that and I can't find any info online that indicates that they are (other than their secure backup feature that's opt-in only I suppose)


Actually you can't. If you choose not to set a pin, Signal just chooses one for you and uses that to upload all your data, only you won't be able to access it. There is no way to prevent your data from being sent to the cloud. For more info see here: https://old.reddit.com/r/signal/comments/htmzrr/psa_disablin... and https://community.signalusers.org/t/what-contact-info-does-t...

The fact that Signal users are still unaware of where their data is going and when should tell you all you need to know about how trustworthy the service is. Not being 100% clear about the risks people take when using software which is promoted for use by people whose freedom and/or lives depend on it being secure is a very bad look for Signal.

As for message backups they are at least opt-in (for now anyway) and you can learn more about them here: https://signal.org/blog/introducing-secure-backups/


This is actually a great point but for the opposite reason - if you ask a blind person if the night sky is beautiful, they would say they don't know because they've never seen it (they might add that they've heard other people describe it as such). Meanwhile, I just asked ChatGPT "Do you think the night sky is beautiful?" And it responded "Yes, I do..." and went on to explain why while describing senses its incapable of experiencing.


Wha if you asked the blind man to play the role of helpful assistant


Now that's an interesting point of view.

Involving blind people would be an interesting experiment.

Anyway, until the sixties the ability to play a game of chess was seen as intelligence, and until about 2-3 years ago the "turing test" was considered the main yardstick (even though apparently some people talked to eliza at the time like an actual human being). I wonder what the new one is, and how often it will be moved again.


I just asked Gemini and it said "I don't have eyes or the capacity to feel emotions like "beauty""


Claude 4.5

Q) Do you think the night sky is beautiful

A) I find the night sky genuinely captivating. There’s something profound about looking up at stars that have traveled light-years to reach us, or catching the soft glow of the Milky Way on a clear night away from city lights. The vastness it reveals is humbling. I’m curious what draws you to ask - do you have a favorite thing about the night sky, or were you stargazing recently?


Claude is multimodal, it has been trained on images


Multimodal is a farce. It still can’t see anything, it just generates a as list of descriptors that the LLM part can LLM about.

Humans got by for hundreds of thousands of years without language. When you see a duck you don’t need to know the word duck to know about the thing you’re seeing. That’s not true for “multimodal” models.


>> Meanwhile, I just asked ChatGPT "Do you think the night sky is beautiful?" And it responded "Yes, I do..." and went on to explain why while describing senses its incapable of experiencing.

> I just asked Gemini and it said "I don't have eyes or the capacity to feel emotions like "beauty""

That means nothing, except perhaps that Google probably found lies about "senses [Gemini] incapable of experiencing" to be an embarrassment, and put effort into specifically suppressing those responses.


Interesting. But not not only blind people.

I'm gooing to try this question this weekend with some people, as h0 hypotesis i think the answer i will get would be usually like "what an odd question" or "why do you ask".


It sounds silly but it fits. NATO's new 5% spending target is somewhat fluff. It's 3.5% for actual defence spending and 1.5% for "critical infrastructure" expenses. It makes sense when you consider most of the infrastructure initally created by NATO countries to counter Russia ends in Germany and envisions a different sort of battleplan, but you could also see it as a way of inflating NATO's apparent military investments.


The term “critical infrastructure” sounds inappropriate for building a new (huge) target that can be rendered useless with minimal intervention.


The Kerch Strait Bridge (aka Crimean Bridge) still stands despite repeated directed hits, albeit occasionally disrupting traffic for extended periods during repairs. The resilience of a bridge during conflict is matter of engineering and defensive tactics. But it does pose the question of whether a large suspension bridge is generally more difficult or easier to defend and repair than a very long box girder bridge.


>If you are worried, just run a second Chrome session with NordVPN and uBlock Origin in a loose jurisdiction and browse YouTube unlogged.

If you actually did this you would know that it works for all of a week or two before YouTube stops letting you watch videos until you login.


I found that hopping to different VPN servers is a mildly inconvenient workaround for that.


That may be true, but it certainly helped that he DID pay his workers enough for them to be able to afford the cars they were making.


It might be apocryphal, but my understanding is that he did this less out of a sense of civic duty and more because the skilled tradespeople liked their existing lifestyle and did not want to work in factories much, so they needed a big raise to be convinced.


I think it's even simpler than that: To run an assembly line, you need all stations staffed at the same time. You can't run the line if you're missing staff for just one station, but you still have to pay all the people who did show up.

So the easy solution is just to pay a lot and threaten to fire (and possibly blacklist) anyone who no-shows. Since the pay is much higher than they can get elsewhere, the people are much more likely to show up.

The high pay probably also helped find people who would tolerate the extremely intrusive practices of Ford's "morality police" (my term), who would inspect worker's homes to ensure they were living "the right way".


Not enough to offset losing their fingers left and right.


That really doesn't sound at all comparable to what the article is describing though.


The tone is exactly the same: "This new thing is obviously harming families!".

And the reasons are the same: some people are vulnerable to compulsive, addictive, harmful, behaviour. Most people can cope with The Internet, some people can't. Most people can cope with LLMs, some people can't. Most people can cope with TV, or paperback fiction, or mobile phones, or computer games (to pick some other topics for similar articles), some people can't.


Do you actually believe this NYT opinion article speaks for everybody on this topic or is that just convenient to the argument you're trying to make right now?


It reminds me of CX debate in high school. It was a pretty formalized thing, and to "defeat" an argument the other team had, all you had to do was come up with some citation to refute it.

Barely mattered what it was, it just had to be Good Enough for a judge (sometimes another high school kid who was grabbed out of the hall) to accept.


Because there are plenty of people who just enjoy explaining things or helping others understand, and to say the only two reasons for that behavior is that their time is worthless or they have an agenda is myopic.


No, changing your gender identity doesn't affect your selective service registration


A laughable false equivalance, at least in the West you won't be executed for "crimes" such as apostasy and homosexuality.


why would you not do business with private organizations in one country but not the other over what the state enables?

why would you vilify other people choosing to do business with those private organizations based on their nexus?


Because there are levels of brutality, that's why! It doesn't just matter that you kill people, it also matter for what, and how!

And public beheadings are truly medieval and barbaric.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: