Орешник

Cyber

[Cem Karsan 🥐 @jam_croissant]

Centralized government control of AI is MUCH MORE dangerous than corporate control…

The checks & balances to governmental control are tenuous at best.

As a free society, we must do whatever possible to help avoid regulatory capture.

[Орешник @elodeonick]

The comments are great 👍

[Kaja Kallas @kajakallas]

The so-called Duma elections marked another major setback for Russian democracy. Their outcome was never in doubt.

The Kremlin silenced dissent, barred the only registered party that opposed its war in Ukraine, and shut out international election monitors.

The veneer of democracy is all that remains in Russia.

I have proposed measures against those facilitating these sham elections in occupied Ukrainian territories.

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@vtchakarova Zelensky is giving strategists like you a show so that you have something to talk about.

[Cassandra Unchained @michaeljburry]

“One of the reasons why I am in favor of less government is because when you have more government, industrialists take it over, and the two together form a coalition against the ordinary worker and the ordinary consumer.”

— Milton Friedman

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@jam_croissant @maralgr Of course, he’ll have to offer something in return.

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

It's an increasingly common take that AI hacking means cybersecurity is doomed.

I disagree. I think cybersecurity is naturally defense-favoring once people get their shit together. And anyone who continues to hold cryptocurrency (including me, ~90% of my net worth) is implicitly making that bet.

Here's why I am making that bet.

First, the oversimplified punchy one-line statement:

If AI can prove Navier-Stokes and FLT, then AI can prove the statement "this program is secure" as a mathematical theorem. Even if the program is very complicated.

Now, the nuance:

(See also: https://t.co/6YPWgVT7rO )

The word "secure" is hiding all kinds of skeletons in the closet in terms of what it actually means. What does it mean for Signal (the encrypted messenger) to be "secure"?

The most basic definition you might think of is: no one who doesn't hold the recipient's secret key can read the contents of the message.

But:

* Did you remember to include _other_ critical forms of security? Can the adversary forge messages? Can the attacker prevent messages from reaching the recipient? Can they cause your client to crash by sending malformed messages?
* Have you made sure that your model of the adversary includes attackers that interfere with the protocol actively and not just passively? And attackers that interfere by replaying messages to you or the recipient that either of you sent over the wire at any point earlier?
* What if the adversary hacked (or _is_) the Signal server?
* How did you learn which public key belongs to the recipient in the first place? What if that process was tampered with?
* What if your device gets hacked at some point in the past or future - is your message still safe then?
* What if your key leaks because of a bug in your operating system? Or because you got a bugged version of the Signal client? Or what if the database is corrupted?
* Or the libraries, interpreter or compiler of the programming language you wrote it in?
* What if your key leaks because tiny perturbations in perceptible signals generated by the hardware leak mathematical relationships that can extract the key a few hundredths of a bit at a time?
* Are you hiding the *size* of the payload? Does that matter?
* You're definitely not hiding the identity of the sender and the recipient, and the exact time each message was sent (think: not just time-of-day, but also time deltas between one message and the next). Is that not enough to deduce a lot of important facts about what relationships you have, and what *kinds* of conversations you are having?

So ... even definitions can be over a thousand lines of code, and need deep careful thought to figure them out.

Working on making definitions more human-readable is of extreme importance - it's perhaps the only "high-level language" that matters right now.

But even still, even despite all of the above, for security-critical components, the definition is a much smaller attack surface than the implementation. Verifying that the definition is adequate is a much more tractable task than scanning over the code directly - and can become even more tractable with better tooling.

Definitions are also _additive_: if two groups have two different definitions A and B, then, well, you can just prove that the program satisfies both A and B. Code is not additive in this way: if a program is A + B, a bug in A _or_ B can sink the whole thing. Definitions are additive. And if you can't satisfy A and B at the same time, you've isolated the most important philosophical issue for your project to spend its next few weeks grappling with.

Sometimes, definitions are not much smaller than the implementation - UI components might be one example. But for many of the most critical components - message-passing protocols, sandboxes, cryptography like SNARKs and FHE - the asymmetry is real.

Historically, a large class of failures with this approach have come from people only verifying a small portion of their code, that they self-declared to be the security-critical portion, and ignoring the rest - and it turns out that something in the rest of the code is security-critical too.

This was reasonable back when verification was difficult and scarce. The solution today: sorry, you have to verify over literally your entire program, including database, networking, any caching layers, everything. Modern AI can do it.

So it's not about "the good guys find all the vulnerabilities before the bad guys do" - that could maybe work too, after all a finite program only has a finite number of vulns, but it's riskier - it's specifically an asymmetric strategy of making code that is much more resilient in the first place.

This is the kind of direction that Ethereum is going in for the next few years. There is no future for blockchains - especially blockchains with scalability and privacy - without doing this. We need to make software actually secure. And we have already made a lot of progress.

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@TheSpeculator0 How else can you be sure that your random dashboard works!?

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@steve_hanke Yes, I’m afraid one of many

[Giovanni Staunovo🛢 @staunovo]

#Kazakhstan plans to purchase 11 billion cubic metres of gas in 2026, with a figure of 9 billion cubic metres under discussion for 2027, Russian state news agency RIA reported on Wednesday, citing the country's deputy energy minister. https://t.co/o2XvoteKTn

[Giovanni Staunovo🛢 @staunovo]

Senior German conservative lawmaker Thorsten Frei, a confidante of Chancellor Friedrich Merz, on Wednesday gave his backing to lowering the sales tax on gasoline, saying it would be an obvious step.
Merz and his government are ‌attempting to address record-high-prices at the pump ahead of a state election at the weekend whose outcome could increase pressure on the chancellor to step down. #oott https://t.co/4wOMnTe9mH

[Орешник @elodeonick]

We’ll see how much oil and gas Ukraine will get from EU this winter.

[Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський @ZelenskyyUa]

Not being able to move oil around and sell it is a big minus for Russia’s budget – more than 100 billion a year. This year it will be even more, 150 billion. We never attack first. Our tactic is to respond where we can because Putin doesn’t respect and won’t even think of negotiating with weaklings.

When Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were here, they proposed thinking about refineries and other energy. I told them we are ready for an energy ceasefire, but you need to know what that means for Ukraine. For Putin, energy is selling oil and gas. For us, energy is having electricity and gas supplies for our people. My message was: If the Russians are ready for an energy ceasefire, it means no strikes of any kind with any type of weapon on energy.

If we speak about grain and agriculture, then no blockade on agricultural exports, because this is about food security for many people on other continents. Russia has up to 70 million tons of agricultural products to sell, and Ukraine needs to sell around 30 million. It’s in their interest too.

If they say, “We don’t attack these facilities,” they have to put a list of their facilities on the table – the ones they don’t want us to attack. Even during the war, you can find some moments to de-escalate. If you negotiate, that means you are showing your goodwill, or political will, to end the war.

From an interview with CBS.

[Mark Zuckerberg @finkd]

Last month I wrote about how we can build a positive and safe future for everyone: https://t.co/eoLGVY8yad

Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and the ability to take its own actions to ensure that happens.

The reality is:

- People won't want to use agents that are misaligned with them and that don't do what they ask, so labs have a strong natural incentive to make their models more aligned.

There is a lot of debate about slowing progress on capabilities until alignment catches up. My view is that trust and alignment are quickly becoming the most important capabilities that will differentiate agents and models. Any lab that doesn't focus on alignment will fall behind.

- Labs face significant liability if their models cause harm, so they have a strong incentive to prevent this as well.

Meta delayed shipping Muse for several months to focus on safety and security. We didn't call for everyone else to do this before we would. We just did it as part of our day-to-day work because it was clearly the right thing for people and for us. I'm proud of the security foundations we've built.

- Engaging independent evaluators and advisors is industry best practice. MSL already does this today in several areas because it helps produce better work. Other labs can just do this too. In general, it would be helpful for there to be a larger and more diverse ecosystem of evaluators.

- Committing the significant majority of compute towards serving people rather than racing towards recursive self-improvement is one of the best ways to ensure we develop this technology safely. Meta has made this commitment and other labs can do this as well.

I believe the key to building a positive future for everyone is maintaining the right balance of power. This is within our power to do.

[Kirill Dmitriev @kadmitriev]

President Putin’s Russia 🇷🇺 : facts the legacy media hides.

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@INArteCarloDoss Or they can do hike and brrrr. Which is what market is kinda pricing in right now. Equities are bid with probability of hike at 80%

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@jam_croissant @christian81789 @MarcoP46262425 @ozzy_livin @tastyliveshow @CVecchioFX @IlyaSpivak Probabilities are constantly changing and you have to make adjustments accordingly. Yesterday probabilities of a downside movement became higher. Today’s CPI print adds additional information which also has to be factored in your probability estimate now.

[The Babylon Bee @TheBabylonBee]

Trump Pledges That If Voters Defeat Socialism In November, They Will Each Get An Equal Redistribution Of Wealth From The Government https://t.co/qe16k9ucsf

[Орешник @elodeonick]

@HormuzLetter Oh wait, those pipelines can be blown up as well? No way!

[Jeffrey Gundlach @TruthGundlach]

Bessent: “I am the house now. Bet against the house if you want.”

They’re betting against the house.

[Financelot @FinanceLancelot]

BREAKING: Trump says he will give every adult citizen $5,000 if GOP wins the midterms

Idiocracy was so far ahead of its time 🤣

[Mario Nawfal @MarioNawfal]

Researchers spent 500 hours and $70,000 and found LG TVs logging plain text transcripts in standby, mapping every device in the house, and feeding it to LG's ad arm

Unplug the internet and it saves the files until you plug back in.

LG says its TVs don't record ambient conversations.

The evidence begs to differ.

216 million of these are sitting in living rooms.

Where are the regulators?

Writer: Daniel