Readit News logoReadit News

Deleted Comment

ritwikgupta commented on FedRAMP 20x – One Month in and Moving Fast   fedramp.gov/2025-04-24-fe... · Posted by u/transpute
tcfunk · 7 months ago
Oracle was already on the FedRAMP list I think. AFAIK this is about getting smaller cloud providers approved to host government projects so there’s more options available.
ritwikgupta · 7 months ago
This is about changing the way FedRAMP accreditation is done for any cloud service, like Box (or a new SaaS that you may create tomorrow). The FedRAMP process requires you go through a certain set of audits, meet a certain set of standards, etc., in order to be approved to host CUI (IL4/5) or SECRET (IL6) information.

Normally this can take a lot of time and monetary investment. On one hand, these processes encode cybersecurity best practices. On another hand, it keeps new companies out of the market.

It seems this effort is doing away with a lot of those processes. I hope the level of compliance stays the same.

ritwikgupta commented on DOGE has 'god mode' access to government data   theatlantic.com/technolog... · Posted by u/perihelions
thebeardisred · 10 months ago
This is generally quite restricted. I personally had to undego a "Public trust" civilian security clearance (which is binding for life unlike the 75 years of TS-SCI).
ritwikgupta · 10 months ago
Public trust is not a security clearance; it is simply a more involved background check. A security clearance is only granted after a T3/T5 investigation and adjudication of the request. The SF312 NDA signed in order to receive your clearance does not expire.
ritwikgupta commented on Data-Centric AI Governance: Addressing the Limitations of Model-Focused Policies   arxiv.org/abs/2409.17216... · Posted by u/ritwikgupta
ritwikgupta · a year ago
With the recent veto of SB 1047, it becomes even more important to ask why these proposed policies are lacking. We suggest that all modern AI regulations are overly broad and flawed because they miss the most important part of AI capabilities: data.
ritwikgupta commented on Google Console closed testing requirements are awful    · Posted by u/Baloo
throwup238 · 2 years ago
I've just been using the MacOS runner in Github Actions. Still requires the $99/year fee but not the $2000 laptop.
ritwikgupta · 2 years ago
Do you have an example of this workflow? Are you developing outside of XCode on a non-macOS platform in Swift and then essentially compiling and packaging using GitHub Actions?
ritwikgupta commented on Chickens in Trees   suziepetryk.com/blog/chic... · Posted by u/tancik
ritwikgupta · 2 years ago
Fascinating. The massive variance in the percentage of chickens that prefer roosting off the ground is interesting. I wonder what environmental pressures drives this decision.
ritwikgupta commented on DOJ: Man sentenced to 14 years for posession of deepfake CSAM   justice.gov/opa/pr/recidi... · Posted by u/popcalc
soulofmischief · 2 years ago
It's not misinformed or incorrect. I'm aware of the current law and how it stand in opposition to the first amendment. Reread my post.

> There is no need to engage in conspiracy theories here

Please do not mischaracterize my post in such a light. There are no conspiracy theories here.

There are ongoing, completely public, campaigns by both the Executive and Legislative branch to regulate access to generative models. There is a reason this press release vaguely uses the term "deepfake", which is completely distinct from dragging and dropping a minor's face onto an adult's body. Whether that reason is deliberate or negligent, it still serves the greater purpose.

The debate over access to generative models with respect to CSAM has been hot for a while now, to ignore that debate and characterize my post as perpetuating conspiracy theories is just disingenuous.

ritwikgupta · 2 years ago
1. The PROTECT Act provisions have repeatedly been upheld by both appellate the Supreme Court as constitutional as long as the CSAM in question meets the Miller or Ferber standards. Either the law is constitutional, or you’re proposing that the courts are illegitimate, the latter of which is conspiratorial.

2. You are right that there is a campaign to limit access to open source generative AI models, but it is not an initiative led by the government. Companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google are leading the charge when it comes to emphasizing the danger of open source models and are lobbying every day to limit access. The executive and legislative branches are following suit with what industry executives tell them because they are deferred to as experts.

Industry policy teams have invented vague, ill-defined terms such as “frontier models” and equate these models as having the same power as nuclear weapons. They have a vested interest in being the sole controllers of this technology.

If you want to counter governmental efforts to limit access to such models, start by countering the FUD pushed by industry in this space.

u/ritwikgupta

KarmaCake day410March 5, 2018
About
Ph.D. student at UC Berkeley working on AI for humanitarian assistance and disaster response.

Email: firstlast@berkeley.edu

[ my public key: https://keybase.io/ritwik; my proof: https://keybase.io/ritwik/sigs/88iY5DNjp9zGJxyemrVgtXw0TsrESOi3zGYoqTTwPZM ]

View Original