True, sometimes. But they don’t have the sheer manpower dedicated to security that Mozilla has, nor the institutional policies that try to mitigate losing a key/account or something like that. Also, technically, vanilla Firefox is first to get the zero-day patches before they filter downstream.

Not that the forks are dangerous or anything, generally.

Well…

With a fork, one is very dependent on the browser dev. Not just on their benevolence, but on their security practices too. And on them pulling in upstream security patches, quickly.

TBH, this is why I do finance stuff on vanilla Firefox. I love browser forks, I really do, but I’m a bit more cautious with them, too.

That’s a significant security risk, unfortunately.

If that happens, I’d suggest a fork with a built in blocker, one that still gets security patches from upstream Firefox.

That’s like 98% of abuse, though. The vast majority of AI abuse is thoughtless, utter laziness.

Bad actors who actually care about “evading detection” wouldn’t use Claude, anyway.

I’m sorry. I wholeheartedly agree with the article, but this bit:

I had no idea that my online interactions would one day be scraped en masse for AI model training. I didn’t ask for Instagram to enable deepfakes on my account. I didn’t want Google to push AI-generated answers at the top of search results. I woke up one day, and generative AI features were stuffed into every corner of all the software I rely on without my consent.

• You post something in public, it is public. You post knowing others might do things you don’t like with it; that’s the bargain. Especially on social media.

• Instagrams owns you. They own every ounce, every dimension of your content on the platform; they can do whatever TF they want, and you have zero legal recourse.

• No one made you use Google search instead of one of many alternatives, including alt Google frontends.

The fundamental issue here is that people, apparently even journalists, still see these Big Tech platforms as benevolent public squares where they have rights. And fairness. That is an illusion, and this is kind of thing keeps happening because everyone believes the lie.

And they don’t bother to even look for alternatives.

Are they really gonna keep getting surprised when platforms keep squeezing them, yet the platforms don’t stop because no one will leave anyway?

On the contrary, I think the impulse to check a user’s post history and judge them is a bad habit on Lemmy.

Take me. Scroll through my history, and you’ll probably peg me as a AI Tech Bro and a… closet neolib, maybe? I dunno. But if it’s along those lines, you could not be more wrong, on either count.

With the exception of extreme trolls (or moderators doing their thing), I think Lemmy’s culture of “purity checks” is poison to the platform. It turns communities insular, toxic, and angry like it does on Reddit, governed by takes that have nothing to do with the particular thread. It kills the focus of communities. It rewards conformance.

And this thread is a good example. I thought OP was raising some good general points, but digging previous comments up threw all that out the window. I’ve seen this happen in other threads, where a technical or fandom discussion devolves into unrelated, raging arguments on something I did not come there to read.