Often when people write something like this, they haven't really looked for alternatives. It reminds me a bit of the rifle creed: "There are many like it, but this one is mine."
Your question is essentially equivalent to "Why are you scared of the Gestapo if you aren't a Jew?"
It's not a coincidence that a winner of the Nobel Prize gifted his medal to the then Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels[1], exactly as María Corina Machado gifted her Nobel medal to Trump. History doesn't repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme. If you close your eyes to all these similarities, you're going to be in for a big surprise.
Also this topic is not about a guy who is in the Epstein files, this is about deporting illegal immigrants and keeping the United States safe. Because there are few ICE agents doing things that an untrained cop does, it doesn't apply to all ICE agents.
The woman who got shot thought she was on a movie set, tried to act cool and then attempted to run over an officer.
Also the guy who said 'Illegal immigrants contribute more than an average American citizen' I laughed my ass off while reading your comment.
For the other comment, you can check yourself if you don't believe in fraud. All the documents are accessible thanks to Tim Berners-Lee, the fraud is still active and if there is a nanometer of evidence that your tax money goes to the Somali immigrants' bank account, you need to investigate that.
By the way, Obama deported 3 million immigrants with ICE while he is president but Trump only 900k.
> Obama deported 3 million immigrants with ICE while he is president
Obama did it the right way, didn't he? Obama's administration managed deportations effectively and humanely, prioritizing criminals and recent arrivals through programs like Secure Communities for over 3 million removals while upholding due process, minimizing community disruptions, and avoiding widespread violence or errors like wrong-country deportations.
> The woman who got shot thought she was on a movie set, tried to act cool and then attempted to run over an officer.
Citation needed. Absolutely wild to claim to know the thoughts of a dead woman. Do you speak for the dead also?
Shills keep bring up Obama deportations. Obama's administration primarily followed the law, observed due process and habeas corpus, didn't send people to concentration camps in other countries, and didn't shoot mother's in the head and then call them terrorists.
It should be clear why the response is so different, there's no need to act naive
You are not going to act with your emotions while you are an police officer.
Watch the whole clip first and third POV, you do not need the read the thoughts of a dead woman. If you try to run over an officer you are going to see some consequences, doesn't matter if you are a mother or father.
If you’re gonna keep bringing up how a couple of ICE agents broke the law, fine, whatever.
1. US Police is very well known to act on emotions instead of actual law or protocol
2. Killing her didn't make the officer safer, now he was being approached by an effectively driverless vehicle.
3. If you put yourself infront of the car for fuck all reason that is your fault, especially as a "LEO" you should know better, but I guess that is what you get when you employ power hungry people with 0 training.
For what it's worth, the ICE agent who shot Good, Jonathan Ross, worked for US Border Patrol for eight years and has been working for ICE for a decade. Further, "Ross testified in December that he was 'a firearms instructor, an active shooter instructor ... a field intelligence officer, and ... a member of the SWAT team, the St. Paul Special Response Team'."[0]
And yet he put himself in front of a vehicle that had a driver and a running engine, and partnered up with other agents who acted as a group with zero cohesion, issuing conflicting instructions, escalating the tension of a traffic infringement they had no actual legal authority to engage with.
Every trained professional I've communicated with in regard to this incident has effectively shaken their head and referred to it as a clown show of epic proportions, a textbook example of how not to engage with the public, an example of how authoritarian states deal with people they have no regard for.
Let's be honest, a great many US enforcement types come to firearms use with an any excuse approach coupled with an absence of ability to de-escalate situations. They act like walking cans of petrol looking for a tinder to throw themselves on.
> The woman who got shot thought she was on a movie set, tried to act cool and then attempted to run over an officer.
Your mind-reading abilities are malfunctioning. There's clear video evidence which disproves your claim. That raises serious questions about your good faith in this discussion.
> keeping the United States safe
From who exactly? Perhaps we could have a foreign country perform an operation to remove the people directing ICE to behave like an occupying force attempting to frighten US citizens into submission. That would help keep the country safe for democracy.
Do you think democracy in the US is worth preserving? Because it sure doesn't seem that way.
> For the other comment, you can check yourself if you don't believe in fraud.
This is a completely irrelevant distraction that just adds to the impression of bad faith from you.
I'd love to know who downvoted the above comment and why. No-one who believes that democracy in the US is worth preserving can possibly support what's going on at the moment.
It depends on your moral framework. For example if you believe killing is always wrong, then guns are not neutral - they're a tool designed for evil uses.
You may be waiting a long time. Low-level IRs lose a lot of information compared to the source language - their purpose is only to execute correctly, which means a lot of the information that we depend on when reading code is eliminated. I'm reminded of Hal Abelson's quote, " "Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute." IRs are the opposite of that. In general, a reverser is going to suffer because of that.
I did some reverse engineering of compiled C code back in the day. Back when compilers and CPUs were simpler, and optimizations were fewer, it was relatively straightforward for a human to do. That's no longer true. I suspect an LLM would have difficulty with it as well, plus the non-determinism that would introduce would be likely to be problematic.
RBAC doesn't help. Prompt injection is when someone who is authorized causes the LLM to access external data that's needed for their query, and that external data contains something intended to provoke a response from the LLM.
Even if you prevent the LLM from accessing external data - e.g. no web requests - it doesn't stop an authorized user, who may not understand the risks, from pasting or uploading some external data to the LLM.
There's currently no known solution to this. All that can be done is mitigation, and that's inevitably riddled with holes which are easily exploited.
The issue is if you want to prevent your LLM from actually doing anything other than responding to text prompts with text output, then you have to give it permissions to do those things.
No-one is particularly concerned about prompt injection for pure chatbots (although they can still trick users into doing risky things). The main issue is with agents, who by definition perform operations on behalf of users, typically with similar roles to the users, by necessity.
reply