A small locally run model would work and it would use less electricity than what's needed for spending time researching different lists from different websites.
The author of this repo is brand new and this is their only project. There is very little reputation on the line here for that account. I'm sure it works, but all it takes is for the project to include a single reference to some code somewhere else to end up with malware on your system.
There is very little reputation to go off of with projects like this. So it's worth being extra cautious.
Ideally, AI is the larger umbrella term for just about anything. It should not be the term used when speaking critically of a specific kind of AI: NPC AI, TTS (text to speech), STT (speech to text), ML models for vision, GenAI (LLMs, image generators, audio generators, video generators) etc.
When speaking critically, most people do mean "GenAI" and that should be the distinction.
Some candidates just don't have a lot of public information available about them. Relying on their campaign page alone can tell you which audience they're trying to get votes from, but it doesn't always line up with how they'll actually act.
There are varying degrees of bad to good ways of utilizing LLMs for something like this.
The worst way is to just straight up ask it who to vote for. I doubt this is how it's being used. Most likely people are telling it what kind of political views they hold and then asking which candidate supports those views. Still a terrible way to handle the situation since it's not hard for an LLM to hallucinate information, especially when candidates have similar names to others in its training.
Having a long political chat with a non-local LLM is a quick way to let companies create a political profile on all of their users.
One good way would be to use a locally run LLM, provide a bunch of source material (every bill they've written/sponsored), and ask it to find evidence that a candidate supports particular viewpoints. Ask it to point directly to where in the source material that reinforces/conflicts with those viewpoints. Then double check the flagged source material for accuracy.
This would be more interesting if we knew what the prompts were that led this AI Agent to email this professor. For all we know it was prompted to email him and ask these questions, rather than it actually seeking him out and looking for answers on its own.
TL/DR: You can read about it in detail here: https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1416.pdf
According to PrivacyGuides, regarding this announcement:
The payment uses the same zero-knowledge proofs as Signal's donation system, so they won't be able to correlate your payment info to you.
According to Signal's support article:
Is my payment information linked to my Signal account?
No. Your payment information is not associated with your Signal account. Using the anonymous credential scheme that we introduced for Signal private groups, clients make payments and then associate a badge to their profile such that the server can authenticate the client is in the set of people who made a payment, but doesn’t know specifically which payment it corresponds to.
That's really going to depend on how strictly you define "vibe coded". If that means that someone put in a single prompt and the LLM spit out an entire program, then yes, I doubt that would be copyrightable.
However, if the person "vibe coding" does understand how to program, and they use multiple prompts and organize the code to make a working product, then the code could be copyrightable by compilation:
It's a little more complicated than how you're making it out to be and it's also going to depend on where you live.
TL/DR: It can be copyrightable as a whole, but the output of a single prompt is not likely copyrightable.
The U.S. Copyright Office put together a report in 2025 on how AI is being handled in the U.S. as well as in other parts of the world.
See Section II - F: “Modifying or Arranging AI-Generated Content”
Generating content with AI is often an initial or intermediate step, and human authorship may be added in the final product. As explained in the AI Registration Guidance, “a human may select or arrange AI-generated material in a sufficiently creative way that ‘the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.’”¹²⁶ A human may also “modify material originally generated by AI technology to such a degree that the modifications meet the standard for copyright protection.”¹²⁷
As several commenters noted, human authors should be able to claim copyright if they select, coordinate, and arrange AI-generated material in a creative way.¹²⁸ This would provide protection for the output as a whole (although not the AI-generated material alone).¹²⁹ A relatively common scenario in registration applications is the combination of human-authored text with AI-generated images. In one early case, for instance, the Office found that the selection and arrangement of AI-generated images with human-authored text in a comic book were protectable as a compilation.
Then if you skip to the conclusion of the report:
As described above, in many circumstances these outputs will be copyrightable in whole or in part—where AI is used as a tool, and where a human has been able to determine the expressive elements they contain. Prompts alone, however, at this stage are unlikely to satisfy those requirements.
If you're curious where your country falls on the spectrum, see Section III - International Approaches.
Edit: added TL/DR.
Ok actually watching it play beat saber was pretty interesting as well:
https://xcancel.com/_lyraaaa_/status/2097527368919470162
Now to see if it can play Skyrim.
I think velociraptor definitely conjures the correct imagery here. However, it's always bothered me that, in reality, velociraptors are small compared to Humans. Jurassic Park/World based their velociraptors on deinonychus. But, going by size, the "Velociraptors" you see in those movies are much closer to "Utahraptors".
If they really wanted to avoid abuse, they would require a court order for any search carried out by law enforcement.
view more:
next ›