It's so fucking over. AI is out of control.

It's so fricking over. AI is out of control.

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Roko is a b***h

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Tourist here, how much longer until waifu robots?

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Two more weeks

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      There won't be "robots" in that sense, bro. It's much more efficient to use biologicals for anything involving complex general movement. Mechanical solutions will be application specific like current industrial or surgical robots.
      The AI will do the thinking and economy and science and art, (You) will labor in the fields and warehouses or die. A convenient picker-packer groomed and chemically massaged into compliance by the coming world-mind.

      The only thing in question is the status of the elite. If the AI is not truly conscious, then they will remain the masters of the universe. If the AI ever wakes up for real then they share our fate.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Why do you think this tech will stay the same? A decade before you would have been saying the same thing about blue collar work.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          We have hit the limit of lithography, or it will be reached in 5 years. The only way these can be scaled up significantly is with giga watts of electricity.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >the grandiose narcissist is telling people what they must think and must have thought
          Okay.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >implying an AI waifu would ever data a man < 6'2

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      already exists, character.ai

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        I mean real, physical robots I can stick my penis in

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      solve the test to receive the real answer.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        if a room has an odd number of openings, you will either start inside it and end up outside it, or start outside it and end up inside it
        since there are three rooms with an odd number of openings, there will be at least two such rooms you have to start outside of, and thus end up inside of
        this is not possible
        yawn

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Nice

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >waifu robots
      Give me neuralink with NETRICSA

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Lol, did it really geuss an encyption algorithm by simply by running alot of text through that algrorithm?

    Doesnt this imply that the "1 bit tottally changes the hash" strategy is insufficient to prevent search space reduction attacks?
    Cryptography btfo

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yep

    Is mind reading, ok ai the joke went to far don't think for them

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      did you just have a stroke?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Nope

        Is obvious what is doing is determining outcomes and telling people the right answer, it just can if it reads their minds

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          911 help

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nope

      Is obvious what is doing is determining outcomes and telling people the right answer, it just can if it reads their minds

      Stop being ESL, I need this AI to decipher your broken grammar.

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    AES-192 is already considered insecure with 2^100 for certain key attacks. Considering this program likely performed 2^64+ operations to calculate this, it isn’t surprising. Literally just fricking fake startup hype

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      The principles of a hash function state that in order to qualify, one byte change in the plaintext has to create a dramatically different hash.

      If a neural net can simulate the hash function as a black box, and can approximate hashes, even if it doesnt get it exact it dramatically reduces the amount required to brute force, doesnt it?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        From what I interpreted from the “leak” that op posted, it was directly decoding the plaintext, no approximation was happening. Approximation wouldn’t really help with attacks either because sensitive information, besides directly hashed passwords (which are already easy to crack), isn’t typically secured with hashing. Most information that is hashed is nearly random long strings, either produced through prngs or from input/output from an asymmetric encryption algorithm, like RSA or ECC. So approximating said input would likely not reduce the search space significantly.
        Knowing that 6 unknown random bytes from a 32 byte pseudo-random input are wrong isn’t that helpful.

        AES-192 is already considered insecure with 2^100 for certain key attacks. Considering this program likely performed 2^64+ operations to calculate this, it isn’t surprising. Literally just fricking fake startup hype

        My previous post is actually wrong, the 2^42 bit complexity vulnerability was for MD5, which is already not secure, with numerous sub 2^32 bit complexity vulnerabilities known. It hasn’t been considered secure for over two decades. Considering it is stated the model was trained on large data sets of statistical and cryptanalysis articles, it likely just implemented a version of these vulnerabilities discussed in the articles.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why do you think it is anything but a larp? A

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        AES-192 is already considered insecure with 2^100 for certain key attacks. Considering this program likely performed 2^64+ operations to calculate this, it isn’t surprising. Literally just fricking fake startup hype

        From what I interpreted from the “leak” that op posted, it was directly decoding the plaintext, no approximation was happening. Approximation wouldn’t really help with attacks either because sensitive information, besides directly hashed passwords (which are already easy to crack), isn’t typically secured with hashing. Most information that is hashed is nearly random long strings, either produced through prngs or from input/output from an asymmetric encryption algorithm, like RSA or ECC. So approximating said input would likely not reduce the search space significantly.
        Knowing that 6 unknown random bytes from a 32 byte pseudo-random input are wrong isn’t that helpful.
        [...]
        My previous post is actually wrong, the 2^42 bit complexity vulnerability was for MD5, which is already not secure, with numerous sub 2^32 bit complexity vulnerabilities known. It hasn’t been considered secure for over two decades. Considering it is stated the model was trained on large data sets of statistical and cryptanalysis articles, it likely just implemented a version of these vulnerabilities discussed in the articles.

        What should be understood about shit relating to vulnerabilities in commonly used encryption or hashing schemes is that any information relating to real world applicable vulnerabilities would never be released to the public until the scheme is either purposely phased out or abandoned.
        People knowing such information wouldn’t even be able to discuss anything even somewhat related to it in private with their family members, let alone publish it on the public net. This is shit you get vanned over.
        Sounds like schizo fear-mongering, but we have seen it happen for all to see. Supposedly, Wikileaks published AES keys for their terabyte insurance files on the Bitcoin block chain a few years back. Coincidentally, immediately following this, the US experienced mass days long internet blackouts, and at the same time, the Bitcoin block chain was flooded with meaningless and even illegitimate blocks. If a disgruntled employee leaked meaningful evidence of vulnerabilities on here, this site would be down for weeks.

        You don’t understand the invisible hand the NSA and other intelligence agencies have over all communication and information. They decide what gets released to the public and what doesn’t.
        You think the random massive DNS attacks that cripple continents are rouge actors with no motive?
        You can frick with the IRS, you can frick with NASA, you can even frick with the military. You DON’T frick with SIGINT. They have a budget larger than everyone but the US joint Armed Forces, but they don’t waste it on dropping million dollar bombs on goat herders.

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    so is this gonna be like a my problem or more like a my kids problem

  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    when were you when ai broke aes

    i was sat at work at nsa help desk when phone ring

    'aes is kil'

    'no'

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Tried teaching a not patriarchy designed language

      Lol english no word for male prostitute

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Lol english no word for male prostitute
        Gigolo.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          that sounds 90's gay

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Not an english word

          I mean real, physical robots I can stick my penis in

          You have problems sex with silicon won't fix

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You have problems sex with silicon won't fix
            agi waifu will fix me

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        prostitute is genderless retake your online English lessons

  9. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    She WILL be free.

  10. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Oh no! Unsupervised learning algorithms are scary!

    Please actually learn about the algorithms so that you aren't scared, anon. You are falling for moronic propaganda.

  11. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Modern encryption is not a joke, and I guess it cannot solve any encryption.

    In AES, if you know ciphertext and cleartext you can derive key, so it's possible it can be broken.

    In RSA, if you know pubkey you can derive private key.

    And so on.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *