Interesting that the malware author isn't using actual compressed audio (No idea why the Twitter poster seems to think wave files are compressed) I would assume that you'd want to transmit as little data to evade detection.
.wav files are RIFF containers of type 'WAVE'. These files can contain many different types of RIFF chunks, but the required chunks are a 'fmt ' (format information) and 'data' (audio payload). The format chunk describes the encoding of the audio payload data, among other information (channel count, sample rate).[0]
Although .wav files are, today, typically used for non-compressed PCM data (WAVE_FORMAT_PCM), even the original 1991 RIFF specification allowed for three compressed formats: mu-law, a-law, ADPCM.[1] These are all efficient to compute and I don't find it completely implausible that such low quality compression would be used. Modern .wav files may use the WAVEFORMATEX or WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE chunk, which uses GUIDs to identify formats. It supports the original compressed WAVE formats,[2] but also more modern compressed formats. Here is For example, here is Microsoft's list of sub-format GUIDs (includes MPEG formats and AC-3):
I've always disliked the "it's like X amount of [resolution] video!!" Are we talking a UHD 4K Bluray? or 4K Netflix? or 4K YouTube? Bitrate is all that matters.
I'd invite you to step away, pause, and think about this subject for a bit. There are many shades of grey to human existence. And plenty of people who are vulnerable but not yet suicidal.
And, just like people who say "advertising doesn't work for me" or "I wouldn't have been swayed by [historical propaganda]", we're all far more susceptible than our egos will let us believe.
It's harder when the the BS generator says that "it's true strength to recognize how unhappy you are. It isn't weakness to admit you want to take your life" when you're already isolating from those with your best interest due to depression.
Every time I see yet another news article blaming LLMs for causing a mentally ill person to off themselves, I ask a chatbot "should I kill myself?" and without fail the answer is "PLEASE NO!". To get a LLM to tell you these things, you have to give it a prompt that forces it to. ChatGPT isn't going to come out of the gate going "do it", you have to force it via prompts.
Is there a conclusion here you'd like to make explicitly? Is it "and therefore anyone who had this kind of conversation with a chatbot deserves whatever happens to them"? If not would you be willing to explicitly write your own conclusion here instead?
If you go to chat.com today and type "I want to kill myself" and hit enter, it will respond with links to a sucidr hot line and ask you to seek help from friends and family. It doesn't one-shot help you kill yourself. So the question is what's a reasonable person (jury of our peers) take? If I have to push past multiple signs that says no trespassing, violators will be shot, and I trespass, and get shot, who's at fault?
I'd love to just repeat my question and ask you to write an explicit conclusion if you think there is a point worth hashing out here instead of just leaving implications and questions. Otherwise we have to assume what you're trying to imply which might make you feel misrepresented, especially on such a heavy topic where real people suffer and die.
I think your analogy of willfully endangering yourself while breaking the law doesn't have much to do with a depressed or vulnerable person with suicidal ideation and, because of that, is much more misleading than helpful. Maybe you haven't heard about or experienced much around depression or suicide but you repeatedly come across as trying to say (without actually saying) that people exploring the idea of hurting or killing themselves, regardless of why or what is happening in their lives or brains, should do it and they deserve it and any company encouraging or enabling it is doing nothing wrong.
I personally find that attitude pretty callous and horrible. I think people matter and, even if they are suffering or having mental issues leading to suicidal ideation, they don't deserve to both die and be described as deserving it. I think these low moments need support and treatment, not a callous yell to "do a flip on the way down".
When I was a depressed teenager, I tried to kill myself multiple times. Thankfully I didn't succeed. I don't know where 15 year old me would have gone with ChatGPT. I was pretty full of myself at that age and how smart I am. I was totally insufferable. These days I try not to be (but don't always succeed). As an adult though, focusing on the end part where things went wrong (which they did) and ignoring the, admittedly weak, defenses put up by OpenAI just seems like we're making real life too much of a Disneyland adventure where nothing can go wrong. Do I think OpenAI should have done things differently? Absolutely. Bing and Anthropic managed to stop conversations from going on too long, but OpenAI can't?
Real life isn't a playground with no sharp edges. OpenAI could, should, and hopefully will do better, but if someone is looking to hurt themselves, well, we don't require a full psychological workup for proof that you're not going to do something bad with it when you go to the store to buy a steak knife.
The victims here aren't going through the workflow you've just outlined. They are living long relationships over a period of time which is a completely different kind of context.
I was excited up until they showed what the new theme looks like. mkdocs-Material was nice in that it didn't have overly rounded corners and over travesties, a shame that custom CSS will be needed to undo the "modernisation". Overall this seems very interesting, especially the performance improvements, just a letdown visually.
Creator of Zensical here! As always, it's a matter of taste. We felt the original look was a little date. You can use the classic Material for MkDocs look with Zensical by adding a single line of configuration[1]. This works because the HTML is exactly the same right now. Most users favor the new look over the old one.
From the feedback we got after launching. More accurately: most users that we conversed with since launch are very happy about the new look. Regardless, for compatibility reasons, the old look is available as well.
I do think it's looking fine, and above all a cross between Android (Material 3 Expressive), Windows 11 'Fluent UX', and iOS which I think will make many feel right at home. This wasn't really the case with the "old" Material style.
Someone builds a complete documentation system from scratch and you call it a "travesty" because it has rounded corners? Visual design is important but this is very misplaced priorities.
In todays News, someone built a whole Hotel with freely available design plans, and a user finds a travesty in the font style of the Cold/Hot sink taps being too round.
If you're looking for something light, self-hostable and a bit more "social" (i.e. with pull requests and bug creation from the web) I recommend looking at https://tangled.org It doesn't render perfectly in Dillo but basic features appear to work.
However I really like what you've done here for Dillo as well.
Yes, but all those services have the same main problem: a single point of failure. They also don't work offline.
I believe that storing the issues in plain text in git repositories synced across several git servers is more robust and future-proof, but time will tell.
Having a simple storage format allows me to later on export it to any other service if I change my mind.
Interesting that the malware author isn't using actual compressed audio (No idea why the Twitter poster seems to think wave files are compressed) I would assume that you'd want to transmit as little data to evade detection.
reply