Visa and Mastercard are subjected to political pressures to disincentivise conducting transactions. If the market would be more diverse, these pressures would be way less effective.
If a digital € would change that is questionable though. Perhaps ambitions would get even worse.
Also a very good argument for cash. I like untracable transactions. I isn't just to benefit crime, it is also about privacy.
Half an hours cannot really summarize this conflict but I would also like to know from those that "just criticise Israel" where any factual inaccuracies lie.
I think making an argument that is weaker than it could be is a form of innaccuracy, "by omission". The case for the Israeli side is stronger than he states it, but those who "just criticize Israel" would not be likely to restate the argument in that way.
Same. I use AI to code, but it often is just scaffolding (I often have projects with limited scope, but a lot of them). It is a real help. Also it shuffles things up, uses solutions I didn't have the time to learn or look up. So it provides some education as well. I still have to check everything, but i basically replaced project scaffoliding tools to a large part.
I also use image generation extensively, but that is for hobby purposes.
I trained some models (RAG) and build some tools, but quickly noticed that is quiet a bit of work even to generate and audit the knowledge base you want to consume. I think it warrants to be a new job position. Problem is that this position needs someone who is very familiar with the processes within a company, so external help here is hard to come by and it would be a longer time investment. If you have success here, I would assume it could boost productivity for workers that aren't that close to AI tech and maybe just used AI for search and questions.
Until now we (only?) have an AI that reads mails and imports the relevant information into our ERP, CRM or general content systems. It queries relevant information about support cases to provide helpful context for case handlers. I think it works quite well, but I cannot imagine it replacing anyone. Exception might be if you specialize on scamming people, that could probably work.
Developers are hit too, although I don't expect that anyone will be replaced. I think AI is a productivity boost, it just takes less times to solve the small problems and get reasonable advice for aynthing beyond. Perhaps it reduced required headcount to implement some features. But companies that expel their knowledge workers for some AI solution probably won't survive long. Those that understand the tooling advantage, will get ahead though.
I love AI image generation, but many certainly do not enjoy the results. I can see some people skimping on paying artists.
First I thought translators would be hit hard by AI, but you probably still need them as well to be decently sure about correctness.
And it remains true that any creativity produced by AI is basically still just a function of the creativity of other people.
Reads like Chatty was a bit annoyed at you. And it remains the expert, not you!
You kind of have to push LLMs to self-evaluate for good answers, although I am not sure what I would take from this on a technical level. I would use MD5 for non-security applications, I even think you could use it in a security context if you really know how collisions can be created and if that would interfere with your application of it. Better advice is to not do that of course.
Although thinking about it. What are non-security applications of hashes? Database indexing comes to mind, where a collision avoidance is the opposite you want. So what remains? For file integrity I would use SHA-2 something, but I don't see how MD5 would perform worse. Are there more obvious applications?
Perhaps the initial answer isn't really technically correct, but I wouldn't say it is bad advice.
Interesting, I'd love to see some more opinions on this. I find the instant "MD5 is broken, don't use it advice" harmful. Not all applications are security related or need absolute highest speed. I actually had use cases in multiple hobby projects, but of course that doesn't there are many.
For example in a distributed event based LAN chat, I used MD5 for an "integrity chain". Every new event id is the hash of the old event id + some random bytes. This way you can easily find the last matching event two systems have in common. Just a random id isn't enough, when two instances integrate an event from a third system, while one of the two added a new event just before that.
No security needed, speed doesn't matter much, it is not designed for high throughput. MD5 seems like a very good choice, because it's easy to work with and can be verified on every system.
As far as I know and that information is probably way out of date, such an integrity chain on MD5 could be compromised as someone would be able to switch out some important bytes (switch the byte with a toggle on "I do NOT want to buy this very expensive washing machine") while keeping the hash value intact. So using MD5 as a signature check on documents like invoices going through unsafe channels is not safe.
But this is a security case that requires a hostile actor. If the problem is just checking for data integrity or in this case data identity without there being a danger for manipulation, MD5 should perform fine. I don't see a problem with your use case. I am no expert here and there are probably more optimal hashes, but MD5 has the advantage of being widely implemented in all kinds of systems.
Because understanding the intrinsic weakness of hashes isn't trivial, many just recommend "MD5 is broken, don't use it". I think this is just to be on the safe side. Many applications would probably be fine, but because to err on the side of caution is safer, people sometimes say that MD5 is the worst hash function ever conceived.
You are using the security argument again. It is not used in an adverserial context. You are correct, that this is not secure. And messages can be tampered with. But this is not the application. The threat model of the application is that everything happens in a private context without adversaries. The communication is end-to-end encrypted and every participant of the chat has total control and is allowed to change everything in the chat, even messages from other users. So there is no point in protecting again adversaries that have access have to the secure channel, because they are already allowed to do anything, even if the hash were cryptographically secure, they are allowed to change everything. The integrity is only for synchronization, so that every participant can easily verify the state of the event history up to a specific point.
Lidar has problems too. It works quite well if there is a limited number of cars that use it too. Of course if all of those were Waymos you could synchronize sensors to not interfere with each other.
Of course if that fails, perhaps they could use honking as backup sensor.
Nuclear is probably a difficult comparison, but in both cases it would indeed be about liability. Would the owner have liability? That would increase insurance by a lot, probably significantly make autopilot much more expensive to have.
Is the manufacturer liable? Autopilot would be too much risk and the manufacturer would demand users can only activate it behind the wheel, needs both hands on the wheel while getting a coffee infusion. The tool would lose its advantages.
Power plants aren't insurable because it would financially destroy any company in case of a leak or operating costs would become so high, that nuclear cannot compete anymore.
We maybe will get it one day. Waymo probably did it correctly. Limited road network, careful approach, learn what the problems are and expand on that.
The manufacturers will take liability. Mercedes-Benz is already doing this with their Drive Pilot level 3 autonomous vehicles. Coverage is limited but will expand.
>DRIVE PILOT can be activated in heavy traffic jams at a speed of 40 MPH or less on a pre-defined freeway network approved by Mercedes-Benz. DRIVE PILOT operates in daytime lighting conditions when inclement weather is not present and in areas where there is not a construction zone. Please refer to the Operator’s Manual for a full list of conditions required for DRIVE PILOT.
If a digital € would change that is questionable though. Perhaps ambitions would get even worse.
Also a very good argument for cash. I like untracable transactions. I isn't just to benefit crime, it is also about privacy.
reply