[Joel_Mckay]

State sponsored thieves are not a talent pool that anyone wants in a trusted position.

The fact is there were only around 40 unique hacks ever invented, and people simply adapt these into new zero day exploits. Notably, this is now mostly a fully automated process.

If people want in, they will get in eventually. =3

x C62=:K6 J@F 2C6 AC66>AE:G6=J 5:D28C66:?8 H:E9 E96 DFCAC:D:?8=J =@H 6DE:>2E6 @7 6IA=@:E E2I@?@>J[ 3FE 9F>2? DE2E:DE:42= 3692G:@C :D 2=D@ ?@E 2D 4@>A=6I 2D >2?J 36=:6G6]

[vntok]

ChatGPT decoded the ROT47 text immediately from a simple prompt: "Decode this string sent by some random pompous guy on Hacker News: [raw string]".

If robots want in, they will get in eventually too, apparently.

[KyleBerezin]

No need for insults, I found it fun. ROTs are easy to detect because they usually still have word-length chunks, and common repeating symbols. In this case the '6's ('e's). This is something a language oriented AI is going to be very good at detecting. It's great demo of why hashing is so important.

If you don't see repeating symbols, it could be a running key, like a Vigenèr cipher.

[Joel_Mckay]

It was a simple way to highlight impulsive behavior common in modern users, and the trivial encoding function should be obvious to those who are minimally empathetic. Ask the LLM handler if being lied to makes people feel worse than getting robbed... then consider if you would hire such individuals.

If you are ever unsure of someones motives, than politely ask for context. Have a wonderful day =3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases#Causa...

[bgwalter]

What is the impulsive behavior? Do you have a zero day in some ROT-47 decoder? Or perhaps a zero day in the file command in case a user creates a file containing the string and runs the command on it? Or is the string both a valid ROT-47 string and a valid executable on some platform?

> If you are ever unsure of someones motives, than politely ask for context.

Asking for context.

[Joel_Mckay]

In general, the point was predicting statistical behavior is easy in large enough populations, and finding utility in that fact is trivial.

Exploits are boring, and thus have questionable utility in a proper business context. Don't worry about it... =3

[theshrike79]

https://gchq.github.io/CyberChef/#recipe=ROT47(47)&input=eCB...

CyberChef did it fully locally with a ready-made recipe :D

[JumpCrisscross]

> State sponsored thieves are not a talent pool that anyone wants in a trusted position

Why? They’re intelligent, crafty and able to make trade-offs.

Empirically, ex-spies have a solid history in reaching commanding positions in politics and business.

[Joel_Mckay]

It is complicated, but Moral Development theory does cover the phenomena of why some won't understand until they personally grow through the stages of development.

Have a great day. =3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_...

[jgilias]

Reading up on it made me realize that a certain well known orange person is really on Stage 2 of moral development. That explains a lot.

But also gives hope. I mean, it’s rare that adults fail to advance from pre-conventional phases, so it must be super rare to have such a confluence of factors that puts someone like that in the given job.

[JumpCrisscross]

Spies do tough work for not that much pay. (Certainly less than they can earn in the private sector.)

They’re starting from a position of duty. Given the stakes the questions they’re tasked with operate at, I’d guess they tend to be in the postconventional regime more than most people.

[Joel_Mckay]

Sounds like an absurd fiction... and still unrelated to a proper business. =3

[Ray20]

> Empirically, ex-spies have a solid history in reaching commanding positions in politics and business.

But it's not because someone wants them there. It's because they can demand the position they want.

[JumpCrisscross]

> it's not because someone wants them there. It's because they can demand the position they want

Zero evidence of this. And if they can demand that position from one, they can demand favors from others. I would count a background in espionage to be a net positive in a hiring process, provided dismissal was on good terms.

[mr_toad]

> Empirically, ex-spies have a solid history in reaching commanding positions in politics and business.

The only examples I can think of are Putin and George HW Bush.