tracy@invalid.com writes:

> On 11 Aug 2023 01:50:48 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 14:55:10 -0500, tracy wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Personally, I'm sick of ths AI crap which seems to exist only in the
>>> minds of the tech idiots. When it devolves into the lives of us common
>>> dummies, I'll worry about it then.
>>
>>Already there:
>>
>>https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ai-powered-litterbox-system-
>>offers-new-standard-of-care-for-cat-owners-301632491.html
>>
>>"Using artificial intelligence developed by a team of Purina pet and data
>>experts, the Petivity Smart Litterbox System detects meaningful changes
>>that indicate health conditions that may require a veterinarian's
>>attention or diagnosis. The monitor, which users are instructed to place
>>under each litterbox in the household, gathers precise data on each cat's
>>weight and important litterbox habits to help owners be proactive about
>>their pet's health."
>
> And why should I be worried about AI for litterboxes?
>
> Let me know when it starts breaking TrueCrypt or PGP encryption and
> devastating our security more than Giggle.com and Redmond are doing.
>
> Until then - shut the *F* UP about *realistic" AI used for something
> outside of bagel baking and litterboxes.

Unless there's an as-yet-unknown flaw in the design of RSA or other
public-key algorithms, there's no way in which an AI of any sort could
"break" encryption -- artificial intelligence cannot beat mathematics. I
guess some hypothetical super-AI could design a quantum computer which
could break non-quantum-resistant algorithms, but that's a pretty far
cry from the gussied-up chatbots most people are talking about.

Anyway I'm pretty sure you've contributed at least 50% of the traffic on
this topic just by whining that people are talking about something you
don't care about. Learn to use your client's scoring system, killfile
the conversation, then take your own advice and shut the fuck up.

john