I'm assuming that the goal of the bloom filter is to prevent the model from producing output that infringes copyright rather than hide that the text is in the training data.
In that case the model would lose the ability to provide relatively brief quotes from copyrighted sources in its answers, which is a really helpful feature when doing research. A brief quote from a copyrighted text, particularly for a transformative purpose like commentary is perfectly fine under copyright law.
NBC News reports that this was contrary to the officer's training and DHS' own policies.
> ICE officers are trained to never approach a vehicle from the front and instead to approach in a “tactical L” 90-degree angle to prevent injury or cross-fire, a senior Department of Homeland Security official told NBC News.
> Officers are also instructed not to shoot at a moving vehicle and only to use force if there is an immediate risk of serious injury or death, the official said.
> ICE officers are also instructed that firing at a vehicle will not make it stop moving in the direction of the officer.
That last point is interesting, because from the video it does seem like there was a risk that the officer made things worse, and actually they did, I forget the car speeds up and crashes after.
NBC News reports that this was contrary to the officer's training and DHS' own policies.
> ICE officers are trained to never approach a vehicle from the front and instead to approach in a “tactical L” 90-degree angle to prevent injury or cross-fire, a senior Department of Homeland Security official told NBC News.
> Officers are also instructed not to shoot at a moving vehicle and only to use force if there is an immediate risk of serious injury or death, the official said.
> ICE officers are also instructed that firing at a vehicle will not make it stop moving in the direction of the officer.
Seems like the car was turning relatively slowly away from the ICE officer. At 00:18 in the video when you can hear the gunshots, he's not in the path of the vehicle. Even if he somehow thought the vehicle was heading towards him, it looks like he could have easily stepped back.
If a masked federal law enforcement officer can shoot someone with impunity in a situation that could have easily been avoided, then we are in a very dangerous place.
Ahh sorry about that! This feedback helped me notice that the hints for the that objective were underbaked. If you reload the page and click "a small hint", I have put in a set of more detailed hints. If you're still stuck email me your game export and I will try to give more help? My email address is on the game's about page.
If this is the translation minigame, the hints there do really help. (I too was stuck for a bit.) You really do want to pay close attention to the ship types that come back as a response from the encoded messages you send out to the other ship and then fill them into the corresponding blanks accordingly. Don't overthink it (I know I did at first).
If you think you have all the words filled in properly but nothing is happening, hint: base64(VGhlIGNvcnJlY3QgdHJhbnNsYXRpb24gb2YgdGhlIGFsaWVuIHdvcmQgImN2aXF6dnhxIiBpcyBub3QgIm5ld2hhcnQiLg==), and spoiler: base64(SXQncyAiZXZlcnN0cm9uZyIu). I suspect there may be a bug in the game that it uses the wrong message at one point.
Reporting is that they had a basically impossible deadline and they took lawyers off of counterintelligence work to do this. So a conscious act of resistance is possible, but it's a situation where mistakes are likely - people working very quickly trying to meet a deadline and doing work they aren't that familiar with and don't really want to be doing.
It seems like a common tactic by this administration is to just not do what they are required to do until they have been told 50 times and criminal charges are being filed. I suspect the actual truth here is 'don't do this' turned into 'you have 1 day to do this and keep my name out of the release' which led to lots of issues. They probably spent more time deciding the order of pages to release, and how to avoid releasing the things damaging to the administration, than actually doing the work needed to release it. Now they will say 'look, see! You didn't give us enough time and our incompetence is the proof'
As far as US persons are concerned, jeffbee is correct that the Snowden leaks are not compatible with the conspiratorial worldview represented by Enemy of the State or the X-Files. The Snowden docs showed things like if two people outside the US were discussing US politics and they mentioned Obama, then the name "Obama" would be redacted because he was a US person. The redaction of US personal info was not perfect but the situation was a very, very long way off from unchecked surveillance and assassination of US persons that was depicted in those films.
> Barton Gellman, a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who led The Washington Post's coverage of Snowden's disclosures, summarized the leaks as follows:
> Taken together, the revelations have brought to light a global surveillance system that cast off many of its historical restraints after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Secret legal authorities empowered the NSA to sweep in the telephone, Internet and location records of whole populations.
It absolutely proved massive, unchecked surveillance. This has never been in dispute, what's your rationale that it didn't?
Please actually read what I wrote. You are responding to something that I did not write.
I did not claim that there wasn't "massive, unchecked surveillance". The specific claim that I made was that the conspiracy-theory films of the 1990s were based on the idea of unchecked surveillance of US citizens that was then used for purposes such as targeting and murder of US citizens in the United States.
There was nothing in the Snowden documents that suggested there were rogue operators going out and murdering Americans. In fact, when it came to Americans specifically, there was minimization, and attempts to abide by FISA, none of which ever featured in 1990s-era conspiracy films. I very specifically spoke about minimization as regards Americans, not globally.
Rogue agents wouldn't leave much of a paper trail. They don't tend to slap together slide decks advertising their operations.
The Snowden docs contain nothing about US black budget funded regime change, drug smuggling, politically motivated assassinations or whatever else countless ex-intelligence whistleblowers have claimed to happen in the shadows. I sure don't think all of them can be believed 100% but I wouldn't have expected anything of this nature to show up in typical S/TS/NOFORN documents that someone like Snowden leaked.
Snowden docs don't contain* anything about what happens in DUMBS, secret military facilities like biolabs, propulsion and energy research or anything else* that conspiracy researchers are interested in.
to my knowledge/memory
* Snowden docs were never published in full so we don't know what Guardian et al decided to not publish because they're all too intertwined with intelligence
In that case the model would lose the ability to provide relatively brief quotes from copyrighted sources in its answers, which is a really helpful feature when doing research. A brief quote from a copyrighted text, particularly for a transformative purpose like commentary is perfectly fine under copyright law.
reply