As an aside, the creator of this site (Riley Walz) has some other awesome projects I’d recommend checking out https://walzr.com

Yeah, extremely misleading title even if it is technically true semantically. The phrasing gives the impression that a bug was found in `lean-zip` as part of the proof boundary when it was part of the unverified archive-handling code.

The archive-handling code was in lean-zip, it just seems the verifiers forgot to write proofs for it (still a bug).

Thats not the main finding of the article however. The main bug found was actually in the lean runtime, affecting all proofs using scalar arrays where the size of the array is not bounded.

And it took them several thousand words to explain what you just said in a sentence.

How out of touch can you be to do something like this?

Billionaire levels of out of touch, is the answer. You simply cannot relate to any normal human when you reach that level of greed.

Just speculating, but I assume the motivation is in a similar vein to the Stop AI movement. https://www.stopai.info/

Thank you for the heads up.

Altman needs to sell off that house and move to an anonymized address. I don’t see these attacks letting up any time soon. Two targeted attacks in three days is nuts.

Or he could move to a military base like several prominent administration officials.

Having lived on military bases that is a false sense of security. That's one gate guard away from a problem. They make mistakes. There are far better options he can afford.

How long could a public figure have a hidden address? It doesn't seem practical.

More likely he will have a new contract with some private security firm.

Some poor security guards are going to end up getting gunned down.

I was thinking more like Blackwater, not standard security.

Maybe he can build a moat, and a well fortified structure on the inside, with a little draw bridge to let people in.

Site doesn’t load for me, just hangs indefinitely.

Altman can both be mentally unwell and a grifter, they aren't mutually exclusive.

> This was on my work computer.

Bold move to do this on your work Macbook. I'd be too worried of getting chased down with a bill when returning the laptop eventually.

Honestly that was the cherry on top for me -- the employee confident enough to just decide "this is my work computer, I need it to do work, I can't do work with my hands being irritated, so I will sand down the edge." Pure gold.

‘I’ve done a lot of work and it wore down’

Crazy that you can't even read an article anymore without having to cough up money and/or provide your personal data.

yes, with a but, rephrased as "crazy that you can't use a private service without payment or otherwise contributing to its profitability" sounds less so crazy.

I agree on the excess.

Publishers really need to get on board with a fair pay as you go scheme.

Something where I pay a fair price for an article or subscription, without the new customer rates, and without the "call us" retention annoyances. Something like the old Netflix, where it covers 80% of what you want at a reasonable monthly fee with easy cancellation.

I wouldn't mind supporting good journalism, but I do mind having a teaser rate that will jump 5x after a year, making it difficult to cancel (call to cancel), and having 1 pay gate per news outlet.

I would argue that "abundance and growing the pie for everyone" is even more unfathomable given how things are structured currently. The wealth gap will continue to widen until something gives.

Can’t believe your comment is being downvoted.

Covid clearly showed how crisis can only benefit the rich and powerful.

AI being used to cut the headcount can somehow be, good? It will just fill the pockets of the powerful.