Ethin Probst 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (340)

• On the post: AI And Cybersecurity: A Glass Half-Empty/Half-Full Proposition, Where The Glass Is Holding Nitroglycerin

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 10 Apr, 2026 @ 02:06pm

  IMO Mythos is theater. Especially given that Anthropic is the one bragging about what it can/can't do and claiming it's super ultra dangerous. We saw the same play out with OpenAI. Given that it is in Anthropics best interest to play this up, I will believe the hype about it when it gets proven by third-party security experts.

• On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 05 Apr, 2026 @ 09:58pm

  The 12-D chess thing is even more hilarious when you consider that they might actually believe it, because 12D chess would be... I don't even know, but it certainly wouldn't be Trump...

• On the post: Senators Ask Tulsi Gabbard To Tell Americans That VPN Use Might Subject Them To Domestic Surveillance

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 03 Apr, 2026 @ 10:03am

  Eliminate section 702. Completely.

• On the post: Aspyr: Hey, Those Crappy Tomb Raider Remastered Outfits Were Made By Our Artists, Not AI!

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 01 Apr, 2026 @ 07:07am

  I'll be the first: I call for whatever is the equivalent of a retraction of this entire post. Seriously. This post would've been good without all the AI boosterism, but then you had to go and add a comparison to something that is not even remotely comparable to the current situation, trying to defend the indefensible, and you completely ruined it.

  I’m going to trust that most of our audience will have some idea of what McCarthyism was in the 1950s. To summarize very briefly, it was an anti-communist campaign that spread into becoming equally anti-leftist throughout the country, with a specific focus on driving the supposed communist influences out of major media in America, such as radio and Hollywood. This led to a public hyper-vigilant in looking for supposed communists everywhere, as well as plenty of cases of false accusations of communist activity purposefully foisted upon people for personal reasons. This rabid, frothy-mouthed era of suspicion became a major stain on America in the 1950s. I’m watching a version of this begin to take form around artificial intelligence.

  You clearly have no idea what McCarthyism is, or just how destructive it was to the lives and careers of those it affected. McCarthyism wasn't just rabid suspician of communism. It came with the racism and typical complete misunderstanding of communism that this country has had for over 30 years. People were suspected when there was absolutely zero evidence that they had communist ties. Even ordinary citizens were hauled before the HUAC and were automatically assumed to be communists, either by association or just because, and they had to prove that they (weren't) communists and that they (did not) have communist associations. (If you want an example, look up the Hollywood Hearings.) This was the state doing it. Not random people. If you were suspected of communism, your life was over. Everything you had was gone. I'm sure there are many things that I have missed in writing this paragraph, so I'm sure others can step in to fill the void to make clear to you just how bad this was. And honestly, I'm wondering if this paragraph even truly encapsulates just how bad this got sometimes. To compare that era to the anti-AI centiment is just... Insane to me. I cannot fathom how you could even remotely think that comparing the two would be an equal comparison. Sure, people are suspecting AI use where AI use might not be occurring, but this actually has some potential evidence behind it, because people are seeing AI writing styles in people's writing, or how low quality the visual assets are, or that all of the music sounds a lot like what Suno created. They might get it wrong sometimes but, given how companies are using AI as an output generator and refusing to just be honest, this suspician is well-founded. If companies were honest, or just, I dunno, actually had artists work on their artwork and musicians work on their music, and didn't use corpo-speak for everything, people wouldn't be so hard on them about it.

• On the post: Greater Than Zero: The Anti-AI Pushback On Gaming Preservation Efforts Makes No Sense

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 20 Mar, 2026 @ 05:52am

  This comparison of human and AI errors (followed by "well, humans do the same thing that AI does, so it's fine!" or something along those lines) has always, always rubbed me the wrong way. Mainly because those kinds of comparisons are invalid to begin with. If you want to bring the errors humans make into the picture, then we must compare what came before to what the AI equivalent brings to the table. If what the AI brings to the table is substantially similar or worse than what existed before the AI came along to "replace" it, then AI has not, in fact, made any kind of improvement whatsoever, and has in fact made things worse. And unlike AI, humans actually learn from the mistakes we make. A human is (usually) not going to continuously make the same mistake (e.g., hallucinating entire paragraphs or pieces of information) repeatedly unless they are doing it deliberately. This is something AI boosters seem to never grasp entirely. Or they deliberately ignore it. I can't tell which, honestly.

• On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 15 Feb, 2026 @ 05:18pm

  Same. I've had disagreements with people (and even gotten things wrong) in the past, and convos here are always nice because in the end I always learn something. Rather hard to do that on other platforms when I'm constantly being insulted or having to endlessly deal with MAGA talking points.

• On the post: Since Last May, ICE Officers Have Been Told They Don’t Need Warrants To Enter Homes

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2026 @ 02:50pm

  It's not treason. Yet. Treason has a very specific definition and very specific requirements that are almost impossible to meet. But notice I said "yet"? How much you wanna bet they'll cross that line eventually? Or they already have and we just don't know about it?

• On the post: EU’s Top Court Just Made It Literally Impossible To Run A User-Generated Content Platform Legally

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 04 Dec, 2025 @ 01:37pm

  Well this is a problem. I was going to move my infra to Scaleway's AMS1 data center. Mainly because their elastic metal offerings are really good. But this ruling is a big problemo. :P EU, please stop making nonsensical rulings like this...

• On the post: Kristi Noem Made Final ‘Fuck The Courts’ Decision Refusing To Turn Deportation Flights Around

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 03 Dec, 2025 @ 12:33pm

  Finally a court decides to hold these fuckers in contempt!

• On the post: The Leopard Has Come For A Small Town Kansas Mayor & Its Residents

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 03 Dec, 2025 @ 08:27am

  Reportedly, Ceballos misunderstood the meaning of that residency and thought he was authorized to register to vote.

  How did this happen exactly? Like, not asking for the obvious answer (that our immigration system is way more complicated than it needs to be), but I'm more wondering: did someone not explain to him what a permanent resident was and what he couldn't do? Or how did this misunderstanding happen? Assuming it was a misunderstanding, that is.

• On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 30 Nov, 2025 @ 03:01pm

  Okay, so I stupidly was typing this in the subject field... Woops? Anyway. What I was trying to say (in the wrong box!) was that, if my understanding is right, it would make sense that perjury charges weren't brought: ICE or whatever fed agency gets sued, it gets brought to the circuit courts, fed lies, and up to SCOTUS it goes, where the fed lies some more. SCOTUS obviously is never going to refer for prosecution a republican for perjury, so that's out. And the DOJ is never goign to prosecute the administration for perjury as long as this administration holds power, so that's also out. Though I have no idea why perjury charges aren't being brought in the state courts where perjury occurs.

• On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 30 Nov, 2025 @ 02:56pm

  Don't perjury charges have to be brought by the DOJ? I know that a judge can refer people for charges, but the DOJ or state AGs have to actually bring them from my understanding. If that is true, then it would make sense why no perjury charges have been brought:

  Don't

• On the post: Not Just Measles: Anti-Vaxxers Have Produced 3 Infant Deaths From Pertussis

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2025 @ 10:33am

  Braaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaains

• On the post: Not Just Measles: Anti-Vaxxers Have Produced 3 Infant Deaths From Pertussis

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 27 Nov, 2025 @ 06:14am

  Local healthcare providers are advocating for the public to get themselves and their children vaccinated to prevent the spread of the disease...

  But vaccines, man! Vaccines! They're evil! Evil I tell you! They cause autism and all the problems known to mankind, man! Evidence, you say? What evidence? There ain't any need for this evidence thingy! Just trust me, bro! - RFK JR, probably

• On the post: The Fascism Is Happening Live On TV

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 26 Nov, 2025 @ 01:09pm

  Articles 90, 91 and 92 mention the terms "lawful", because orders are presumed to be lawful by default. A servicemember has no time to debate the lawfulness of orders handed down by their superiors. That's the job of the courts. Sure, a servicemember can refuse unlawful orders. But to simplify it down to "it's codified in the law itself" is stretching things, I would think. If a servicemember refuses to execute an order, they risk a 50-50 that the court finds that the order was, in fact, lawful. So I raised this because things are a lot more nuanced/complicated than just "they have a duty to refuse unlawful orders".

• On the post: The Fascism Is Happening Live On TV

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 25 Nov, 2025 @ 04:40pm

  Source for the video: https://youtu.be/TwPLqGkYnBA

• On the post: The Fascism Is Happening Live On TV

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 25 Nov, 2025 @ 04:36pm

  Mark Kelly—former Navy combat pilot, astronaut, sitting United States Senator—stated a simple legal fact on video: members of the US military can refuse illegal orders. Not as opinion. Not as political positioning. As established law codified in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and affirmed at Nuremberg when “I was following orders” was rejected as defense for war crimes.

  I don't mean to be that pedant guy, but this isn't actually codified anywhere in the UCMJ. All the UCMJ says (in art. 92) is "Any person subject to this chapter who violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation; having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct." Legal Eagle has quite a long video describing just how nuanced this is. Even (say) murder is nuanced, because you might reasonably say that an officer being ordered to assassinate a civilian is manifestly unlawful, but the text of Art. 118 leaves a lot of wiggle room: "Any person subject to this chapter who, without justification or excuse, unlawfully kills a human being, when such person has a premeditated design to kill; intends to kill or inflict great bodily harm; is engaged in an act which is inherently dangerous to another and evinces a wanton disregard of human life; or is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of burglary, rape, rape of a child, sexual assault, sexual assault of a child, aggravated sexual contact, sexual abuse of a child, robbery, or aggravated arson; is guilty of murder, and shall suffer such punishment as a court-martial may direct, except that if found guilty under clause (1) or (4), such person shall suffer death or imprisonment for life as a court-martial may direct, unless such person is otherwise sentenced in accordance with a plea agreement entered into between the parties under section 853a of this title (article 53a)." All of this said, there is precedent for disobeying manifestly unlawful orders. But most officers in the military, from my understanding, are not intended to know what and what is not "manifestly unlawful," and the default is to assume that if you are given an order, it is lawful (because it is presumed that your superiors would not give you an order if it were unlawful).

• On the post: Kansas County Pays $3 Million Settlement For Illegal Raid Of Local Newspaper’s Office

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 18 Nov, 2025 @ 05:10pm

  Shouldn’t it be the individuals who committed the illegal acts who pay damages/go to jail/etc?

  Your thinking like a logical and rational person. The laws that protect these people (and which also punish the taxpayers for this) aren't written by or for logical or rational people.

• On the post: Formula 1, Others Oppose Arena Football One’s Logo Trademark Application

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 18 Nov, 2025 @ 09:45am

  Damn, you guys beat me to it. I was going to remark about this too.

• On the post: License Plate Surveillance Logs Reveal Racist Policing Against Romani People

  

  Ethin Probst ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2025 @ 04:04pm

  ... and expressed efforts to address the issue internally.

  Yeah right. Sure you did. Pull the other one.

Next >>