Maybe it's just a matter of how much effort people put into finding exploits on the two apps. If WhatsApp has many more (actual) users than Telegram, researching exploits on WhatsApp is more worth researching on WhatsApp than Telegram
A bit like how there's much more malware for Windows than there is for Linux
> this isn’t a political fight. It’s not a he-said, she-said between tech billionaires. It’s a technical question.
> In transit. Between two online devices. With no cloud backup. With no business accounts. With no Meta AI features. With no linked devices. With no law enforcement warrant for metadata.
> Under every other condition — which is how most people actually use WhatsApp — the story changes dramatically.
Breaking: language model whose purpose is to predict the most likely token, after being trained on non-uniform human-generated dataset, does not follow a uniform distribution.
The higher the variety of notes (out of the overall 12 sounds in an octave) in the song, the less this becomes possible.
If your song is really simple, e.g. only consists of the 3 notes that make up a major triad (root, third, fifth), then this is definitely possible and you can just use natural thirds and natural fifths.
But as you start adding more notes, more chords and perhaps change of keys etc, it starts to break down.
That's the reason why J. S. Bach wrote The Well-Tempered Clavier.
It's a collection of 24 preludes and fugues, in each possible major and minor key.
The basic idea was that if every prelude and fugue sounded good on an instrument (organ, harpsichord etc.), than it meant that the instrument was "well-tempered".
Using natural tuning instead of 12-TET would have resulted in some pieces sounding very good and other sounding very bad.
I appreciate your good faith but I tried to copy-paste the first ~7k character of this (not yours!) article in an AI detector (gptzero) and it's "highly confident that this text was AI generated" with a probability of 100%