SnoopSqueak

“These grown white men who run these organizations are acting like 2-year-olds… They just don’t want to be told what to do.”

Just like my parents. And people are dying as a result.

Yeah, they probably don’t. But public search engines typically do.

It is very, very difficult to keep anything private these days.

I just wanted to play damn game. On my damn computer. But no, I got a bug to deal with and first spotted comment is from some unhinged dev.

We don’t see enough in the screenshot to feel your outrage. If you mentioned wanting to play a game, it seems reasonable for them to ask for clarification whether your computer is completely unusable or has some functionality.

I don’t think they were trying to correct you, I think they were trying to help you troubleshoot by getting more details about the issue. I could be wrong.

How do you think I feel and how willing I to provide any help with debugging?

I understand the disappointment and frustration. Unfortunately, no one can diagnose your problems from a distance without your cooperation.

I hope you are able to resolve the problem and enjoy your game. I’ve lost my shit for less, and it can be easy to lash out, even at people who are genuinely trying to help us.

Yes, Anthropic presumably submitted a request to block search results that lead to Claude chats, as well as to remove the ones that were already there. Google’s removal tool can remove results that had been indexed, and the “noindex” meta tag prevents future indexing, if I’m understanding correctly.

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9689846?hl=en

does google still has the URLs that it has already scraped?

My guess would be yes. I doubt the removal tool actually deletes content, more likely it just deactivates it. It could theoretically be reactived or used for something else, possibly even inbreeding (AI chat logs to train AI on) or selling data to whoever pays for it. But that is just a guess, I could be wrong. I don’t have much optimism when it comes to corporations, they tend to be as evil as they can get away with. If they legally acquired the content from those links because Anthropic neglected to protect them, there may not be many limits to what Google can do with those chat logs.

Claude fucked up, and gave Google a way to index public links of people.

Anthropic fucked up, Claude is not a person.

After this news broke, they asked Google (and other search engines) to not show those urls anymore.

Correct, that seems to be the case.

People fucked up and/or fell victim to Google’s the data hunger, which let Google to index their public links

Kind of. The user fuck up would be not realizing that Anthropic had no protections from search engines, and that by clicking “share” they were creating publicly accessible links.

after which Claude asked Google not to index such links.

Anthropic seems to have updated the domain those links are generated on so that crawlers do not index public chats, yes.

I guess, in the end, I’m mostly wondering if the long random strings of public links are generally “brute-force-discovered” by crawlers like Google, or whether “discovery” of such links requires some kind of breach.

I am also curious. I looked it up. https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/how-search-works

The first stage is finding out what pages exist on the web. There isn’t a central registry of all web pages, so Google must constantly look for new and updated pages and add them to its list of known pages. This process is called “URL discovery”. Some pages are known because Google has already visited them. Other pages are discovered when Google extracts a link from a known page to a new page: for example, a hub page, such as a category page, links to a new blog post.

If I had to guess based on this, Google had probably indexed the domain Claude or its frontend run on and automatically scooped up the public chats as they became available.

It is also possible that any Claude chat shared will still be accessible to web crawlers, if they just ignore the flags telling them not to scrape, crawl, access, index, etc.

Did these people publish the urls somewhere publically themselves?

They created a public link. Google scraped it because it wasn’t told not to.

From the article:

A spokesman for Google made clear to the BBC that the company does not control “what pages are made public on the web,” saying instead that action comes from websites.

“We give site owners clear controls to decide whether pages can be crawled or indexed, and we always respect those directives.”

As the search indexing of the chat logs is no longer occurring, it is likely Anthropic used available tools to quickly block the chat log links from search results. Google’s process for a website owner to block a link is straightforward, but must be initiated by a website owner.

Google was not the only one:

Other search engines like Bing, Brave and Duck Duck Go, through which the Claude chat logs also appeared, were approached for comment.

Well, unless your base has been conditioned to accept whatever you say instead of paying attention to reality. Then you can completely contradict yourself and still get support, somehow.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crlx8w5wdl0o

“When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on day one.” Aug 2024

“They’re dying, Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done - I’ll have that done in 24 hours.” May 2023

The trinity was invented to avoid accusations of polytheism, but as usual with religious apologetics it just adds more confusion.

Jesus, god, and the holy spirit must all be one, otherwise the religion is not monotheistic.

But if they are all one, why ever distinguish between them?

So believers arbitrarily assign different roles to their three different gods while pretending it’s all the same guy. God is immune to logic, and many christians dare not question their own salvation. It is moral and intellectual cowardice, and it is killing us all.

Yeah. The bible is literally unbelievable, it contradicts itself. Every “believer” has their own headcanon.

With all due respect I’m not really sure your feelings on what constitutes humanlike matters much.

Fuck you too, shitbag.

It is not a thinking machine. But it is advertised as an agent, a personal companion, etc. Companies take turns releasing “rogue” AI to fool people into believing it can think for itself.

We have LLMs. We do not have artificial intelligence. They call it that, but it’s all marketing. It’s not remotely humanlike.

We have writing. We have machines. We have computers.

We do not have AI.

“AI” is more of a scam than a tool.

We do not yet have artificial intelligence. At all. They only call it that to scam idiots.

“I put millions of lines of code in a blender and kept re-rolling the output until I got something that kind of does what I want it to” will always be less efficient and more error-prone than a competent dev or team building with specific intent.

People who can’t tell the difference approve bloated code with myriad vulnerabilities. Often, AI output doesn’t actually do what it pretends to do.

If you’ve worked in any IT project, you will remember the most common issues: unclear requirements, scope creep, silos or misaligned incentives.

For AI projects, you can add to the list: “We’re not even sure this thing works the same way every time” and you’ve got a perfect storm for failure.

https://towardsdatascience.com/why-ai-projects-fail/

An annoying trend I’ve noticed in articles like this is that they still insist the AI is not to blame. Phrases like “devs love the technology,” fuck no I don’t. Or “95% of AI projects fail, but yours will totally succeed if you do it right”. It feels exactly like how the lottery exploits people’s hopes.

The steps required to make AI function are too costly to make AI worthwhile in almost every case. It was a stupid scam that too many companies fell for.

Another psycho christian who thinks eternal punishment is somehow loving.

Fuck off, death cultist.

I have to consciously remind myself that my parents were and are wrong.

Sometimes I imagine the versions of them that live in my head gagged and bound in cages.

No, dad, it was not a self-fulfilling prophecy that ruined my life, it was child abuse. No, mom, I should not repress my own emotions to please others. I am a human being, not your fucking possession.

They’ll be part of me for as long as I am alive, but sometimes I can shut them up.

I am trying to make something out of the ruins of my life. Not much luck so far. Therapy hasn’t helped yet. I wish people would stop normalizing abuse. The bible belt is a cesspool of stubborn, deadly ignorance.

Our first parents willfully chose to rebel against God, thereby sinning and introducing death and other negative consequences, including suffering, into man’s earthly existence

ALL OF WHICH IS GOD’S FAULT IF HE IS ALL-POWERFUL. What part of that are you struggling to understand?

Why are innocent children killed for the mistakes their ancestors made?

Stop outsourcing your thinking. Shitty apologetics are like AI to you, they hallucinate and tell you what you want to hear and you pretend it is fact.

He came down to earth as the Son of Man.

To solve problems of his own creation in needlessly violent fashion, I know the story.

And my argument for God is basic philosopy and logic

Half of philosophy is as baseless as theology. There is no grounded standards. You’re bad at applying logic, too. All you have are fallacies.

Literally none. The problem of evil/suffering definitively disproves a god that is both loving and powerful.