Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jolmg's commentslogin

> stop their team using Copilot

> If the officer had used tools after

They didn't use tools. They did a Google search and assumed the results didn't originate from an AI tool.

The lesson from the article is that even if you don't use AI tools, AI content may still creep into your investigation.


They specifically used Copilot according to the article.

It doesn't say they used Copilot. It says they used output *from* Copilot.

> his force used fictional output from Microsoft Copilot

That doesn't mean they used it; it only means that the content originates from it. They apparently got it from Google search result:

> officers had found this material through a Google search

And apparently that source either used Copilot or the source of their source used Copilot, etc.


Might be more of a difference between what to do in your working (employee) life vs in your private life. In your private life, you can't get scraps because it's generally work on things you own, like a business, personal fitness, skills, etc. In your employee life, you're generally working on things that you don't own for recognition to get a promotion or raise. There the recognition is the entire point and people may not look too deeply into who did what, so you may need to be more overt about things.

> I'd deem it rude that something as low-effort as an AI generated blog post was shared here.

The one that shares needn't be the one that wrote the piece, and it's not always obvious when something was AI-written.


Except it's not a bug that found use. It's intentional behavior. From https://specifications.freedesktop.org/clipboard/latest/:

> The rationale for this behavior is mostly that [having a unified clipboard] has a lot of problems, namely:

> - inconsistent with Mac/Windows

> - confusingly, selecting anything overwrites the clipboard

> - not efficient with a tool such as xclipboard [(tool that maintains a history of specifically CLIPBOARD; it would be messy to keep a history of all selections)]

> - you should be able to select text, then paste the clipboard over it, but that doesn’t work if the selection and clipboard are the same

> - the Copy menu item is useless and does nothing, which is confusing

> - if you think of PRIMARY as the current selection, Cut doesn’t make any sense since the selection simultaneously disappears and becomes the current selection


The selection buffer is easier to understand if thought about more simply. Middle click to “put my selection here”.

The actual clipboard is a separate feature in my mind.


There are a number of DE-independent clipboard managers that can do that as well as other features, like keeping a clipboard history so you can copy in series then paste in series, or having keyboard shortcuts transform the clipboard contents by way of a command, so you can e.g. copy some multi-line text then paste it as a single line joined by spaces.

There's no concept of "external". What would it be, "USB" or anything mounted under /mnt or /media? What if it's the root OS drive of another computer you're trying to fix connected through a USB-SATA adapter? Should any program running with minimized privileges get to overwrite even root files in that OS drive?

I think that it's a pretty good heuristic that if permissions exist in the filesystem, they matter and shouldn't be ignored.


They shouldn't be ignored. but they can be ignored, is the problem. File permissions are not encryption or security: If I can't read a file on this machine, because I'm not root, I'll just move the drive to a different machine where I am root.

But I agree with you, they do have a use and to some use cases matter, and we shouldn't arbitrarily decide to ignore them.


> But I've never used a banking app on my phone before. Anything important I still like to do on a desktop.

A lot of banks require using their banking app to get a 2FA token to log-in on a desktop web browser.


It's not considered secure enough.

What's to hate about them?

You might be talking about Garmin now-smartwatch devices. The first Forerunners look like something you'd strap on a bike's handlebars. They weren't referred to as smartwatches, but as "personal trainers" and didn't seem to display the time-of-day to classify as a watch. Pebbles and the predecessor InPulse seem to always have been smartwatches, though the need seems to have started by wanting to avoid taking out one's phone while on the bike. Garmin pivoted, but I don't think Pebble did.

How was the Pebble born? - Twitch https://share.google/jEulfpqJNh6S5yBuL

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: