Yet another reason not to feast on OpenClaw

Thirty ClawHub skills published by a single author are silently co-opting AI agents and creating a mass cryptocurrency mining swarm – without any malware or user consent.…

From our Anonymous submitter:

Our company creates graphs to visualize data. We have many small fish customers, but we have one whale who uses our product that is 90% of company revenue. (WTF number 1.)

So if he is not happy, it's all-hands-on deck-mode.

He complained that our APIs and charts are loading slowly for him. For 3 weeks, we've tried a TON of optimizations, including WTF 2: spinning up a special server he alone can hit.

Today, we found out that he's always complaining when he's in his car, driving from home to the office. But since he "totally has the best wifi money can buy," that isn't worth investigating.

WTF 3: thinking wifi and data are always 100% reliable in a car driving around.

Our submitter highlights one of the major pitfalls of the so-called whale client: if they're a bad client, you're in for an extra-bad time.

As I lean harder into freelancing, I'm learning to scan the waters ahead of me for potential whales. My goal is to build up multiple small, diverse income streams, because I've had my own dangerous encounters with whales in the past.

At one employer of mine, there was Facebook, who acted as if they were our new owners rather than a new customer. They'd already produced flashy marketing videos of the sorts of solutions they planned to implement with our software, showing people delighted with the results. In meetings, these things were talked up as amazing game-changers. Meanwhile, I found all the things Facebook wanted to do horribly creepy and invasive.

Even worse, Facebook began dictating how our award-winning technical support should change to accommodate their whims, up to and including having a dedicated toady—er, support rep—who did nothing but field Facebook-related tickets, similar to a technical account manager (TAM).

That was the last straw for me. I left that company before I was forced to deal with any of Facebook's crap.

My second whale sighting occurred at a startup that'd landed Porsche, far and away their biggest client ever. All of a sudden, our timeline for adding new features and fixing bugs became Porsche's honey-do list. All of a sudden, the platform frequently crashed and became unusable for everyone because it couldn't handle the amount of traffic Porsche (and their clients) hurled at it.

On the other hand, there were several times in that startup's existence when a big wad of promised funding failed to materialize. Porsche kept the business afloat and literally kept my lights on.

I find it less than ideal to be at any company's mercy. I want a world that would neither spawn whales nor millions of startups named Sploink, Dink, and Twangle that promise to bring the power of AI to your dinner fork.

Have your own epic whaling adventures? Share with us in the comments!

NRC: Schatrijke Rotterdamse weldoener Martijn van der Vorm overleden [Droom en Daad, Verre Bergen, Fenix, Boijmans, Depot, Fotomuseum, (…)]

Een lezer vroeg me:

Mijn werkgever is druk bezig met het implementeren van AI en het trainen van AI modellen. Hij kijkt daarbij sterk naar wat anderen doen, en heeft daarbij dit artikel gelezen over toetsaanslagen van personeel gebruiken om AI scherper te laten werken. Kunnen wij als werknemers daar bezwaar tegen maken? En hoe komen we er überhaupt achter of hij dit doet?

Uit het bronartikel blijkt dat het gaat om een manier om AI agents beter te laten werken: “het doel van de tool [is] om de AI-modellen van Meta te trainen om de computer te gebruiken op de manier waarop mensen dat doen, zoals het kiezen uit dropdown menus en het gebruik van keyboard shortcuts.” Als je breed registreert hoe mensen werken, kun je een AI dat beter aanleren, is de gedachte.

Het bijhouden van toetsaanslagen voelt als nogal een inbreuk op je privacy: je werkgever krijgt buitengewoon gedetailleerde informatie over wat je precies doet, op de seconde nauwkeurig. Het tegenargument hier is natuurlijk “daar kijkt geen mens naar, we trainen alleen een AI model op een hele berg data”.

Het vervelende is: dat is juridisch nauwelijks te weerleggen, in ieder geval niet op voorhand. Er moet grof gezegd iets misgaan voordat je actie kunt ondernemen. Als je organisatie een OR heeft, is er nog een preventief haakje: “een regeling omtrent het verwerken van alsmede de bescherming van de persoonsgegevens van de in de onderneming werkzame personen” valt onder het instemmingsrecht van de OR. Ook als het doel niet direct raakt aan privacy of aan beoordelen of volgen van mensen.

Bij verwerkingen van persoonsgegevens op grond van gerechtvaardigd belang (wat hier de grondslag moet zijn) kun je altijd bezwaar maken (artikel 21 lid 1 AVG). Het enige is dat je dan “met zijn specifieke situatie verband houdende redenen” oftewel persoonlijke en enigszins zwaarwegende redenen moet aandragen. Het abstracte “dit raakt mijn privésfeer” of “ik ben bang voor misbruik” is niet genoeg.

Arnoud

Het bericht Mag een werkgever mijn toetsaanslagen opnemen om er een AI agent mee te trainen? verscheen eerst op Ius Mentis.

Thomas Hawk posted a photo:

Thomas Hawk posted a photo:

date stamped on slide, May 1984

Social

Het lijkt erop dat de impassa in de onderhandelingen langzaam overgaat in staand beleid. De Wall Street Journal schreef afgelopen nacht dat Trump over wil gaan tot een langdurige blokkade van alle schepen van en naar Iran, en dat dit minder riskant zou zijn dan het hervatten van de luchtaanvallen tegen het regime: "President Trump has instructed aides to prepare for an extended blockade of Iran, U.S. officials said, targeting the regime’s coffers in a high-risk bid to compel a nuclear capitulation Tehran has long refused. In recent meetings, including a Monday discussion in the Situation Room, Trump opted to continue squeezing Iran’s economy and oil exports by preventing shipping to and from its ports. He assessed that his other options—resume bombing or walk away from the conflict—carried more risk than maintaining the blockade, officials said."

En verkijk u niet, deze blokkade decimeert wat er nog over was van de Iraanse economie, honderdduizenden banen gingen verloren en mogelijk loopt dit op tot 1 miljoen, en het _Critical Threats_-kanaal van het Institute for the Study of War (ISW) schrijft nu dat het regime zich om deze redenen voorbereidt op een nieuwe protestgolf: "Iran’s highest national security decision-making body is preparing for a potential protest wave as economic deterioration and social pressure intensify. Iran’s prolonged internet shutdown is also posing severe economic damage and accelerating unemployment, which likely increases pressure on regime stability." Afijn, wij gaan weer eens tankers turven en live.

Update 08:19 - Er voeren gisteren 11 schepen door Hormuz. 9 vanuit de Arabische/Perzische Golf westwaarts naar de Golf van Oman, en 2 de andere kant op. "Vessels passed through the strait from west to east were the Panama-flagged bulk carrier New Pioneer, departing from Argentina and the Comoros-flagged landing craft Samia 1, hovering between Iranian ports, according to AIS data. Movements in the opposite direction included the Comoros-flagged bulk carrier Gulf King, from Iran to Oman; Iran-flagged landing craft Hakim Khamir, from Iran to the United Arab Emirates; Bolivia-flagged cargo ship Midas 7, departing from Iran; Panama flagged Starway, from the UAE to Oman; Iran-flagged Bari 25422, departing from the UAE; Comoros-flagged landing craft Al Batha, from Oman to the UAE; Antigua and Barbuda-flagged container ship Paya Lebar, from the UAE to India; Panama-flagged crude oil tanker Idemitsu Maru, departing from Saudi Arabia; and Panama-flagged general cargo ship Roya, from Iraq to the UAE."
Update 08:25 - Trump haalde gisteravond nog even hard uit naar Duitse kanselier Merz: "The Chancellor of Germany, Friedrich Merz, thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about! If Iran had a Nuclear Weapon, the whole World would be held hostage. I am doing something with Iran, right now, that other Nations, or Presidents, should have done long ago. No wonder Germany is doing so poorly, both Economically, and otherwise!" Eergisteren zei Merz dat 'het Iraanse regime Amerika vernedert met zijn geniale onderhandelingen'.

Zoals eerder gezegd: de gehele Iraanse bevolking is nog aan zet

SocialDoneer hier

Over twee weken komt volgens de ‘droogste’ voorspellingen het neerslagtekort op een niveau dat normaal pas hoogzomer bereikt wordt. Hoe erg is dit?

Elon Musk testified on day two of his trial against OpenAI, saying he helped create the company as a nonprofit counterweight to Google and would not have backed it if the goal had been private profit. CNBC reports: Musk on Tuesday was the first witness called to testify in the trial. He spoke about his upbringing, his many companies, his role in founding OpenAI and his understanding of its structure. Musk said in his testimony that he was not opposed to the creation of a small for-profit subsidiary, "as long as the tail didn't wag the dog." Musk said he was motivated to start OpenAI to serve as a counterweight to Google. He got the idea after an argument he had with Google co-founder Larry Page, who called Musk a "speciesist for being pro-human," he testified. "I could have started it as a for profit and I chose not to," Musk said on the stand.

Earlier, attorneys for Musk and OpenAI presented their opening arguments to the jury. Musk's lead trial lawyer, Steven Molo, delivered the opening statement for the Tesla and SpaceX CEO. OpenAI lawyer William Savitt gave the opening statement for the AI company, Altman and Brockman. OpenAI has characterized Musk's lawsuit as a baseless "harassment campaign." The company said Monday in a post on X that it "can't wait to make our case in court where both the truth and the law are on our side."

During his testimony on Tuesday, Musk repeatedly emphasized that he founded OpenAI to serve as a counterweight to Google. He said he got the idea after an argument about AI safety with Google co-founder Larry Page, who Musk said called him "a speciesist for being pro-human." Musk said he was concerned Page was not taking AI safety seriously, so he wanted there to be an nonprofit, open source alternative to Google. "I could have started it as a for profit and I chose not to," Musk said on the stand. Further reading: Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Head To Court

Read more of this story at Slashdot.