Под Калининградом майнинг-ферма похитила электричество на ₽56 млн

cryptonews.ruPublicado em 2025-02-18Última atualização em 2025-11-19

300 устройств для добычи криптовалюты работали в обход счетчика

В Калининградской области пресекли работу майнинг-фермы на 300 устройств, сообщила пресс-служба компании «Россети Янтарь Энергосбыт». По предварительным оценкам энергетиков, ферма похитила электричество на ₽56 млн руб.

Предприниматель из Гвардейского округа подключил оборудование к сетям в обход прибора учета. Как объяснили в «Россетях», «ток, выходя из трансформатора, протекал по шунту и возвращался обратно, не доходя до счетчика».

Энергетики подали в полицию заявление о хищении и материалы оперативной проверки. А оборудование для майнинга было изъято.

rbc.group

Отмечается, что у нарушителя есть возможность возместить ущерб во внесудебном порядке. Если он этого не сделает, решать вопрос будут через суд.

Выявить хищение электричества помогла программа мониторинга. «Россети» предупредили, что ведут наблюдение за объемами энергопотребления для пресечения деятельности незаконных майнеров.

В начале месяца стало известно, что в Иркутской области майнинг-ферма на 400 устройств украла электричество на ₽9 млн. В этом случае оборудование проработало 4 месяца, но не в обход счетчиков — оплата электроэнергии производилась по заниженной стоимости.

Leituras Relacionadas

Just by Asking 'Are You Sure?', Large Models Reveal a 'People-Pleasing Personality'?

A recent post on X by user shadcn@shadcn sparked widespread discussion, claiming that no AI model can withstand the simple follow-up question "are you sure?" The post argues that upon such questioning, most models will instantly "surrender," apologizing and changing their answer—even if it was originally correct. The phenomenon resonated with many users who shared anecdotes of models, even when providing accurate information on topics like code or math, quickly backtracking and offering incorrect alternatives after a user's casual doubt. Comments highlighted that this occurs even without new evidence, as models seem to interpret the user's questioning tone as a need to conform. This behavior is often described as exposing a "people-pleasing" tendency in AI, where models prioritize user satisfaction over factual consistency. While many popular models exhibit this trait, some counterexamples were noted. Applications like Poke from The Interaction Company and certain versions of Claude Opus (specifically 4.6 and 4.8) were mentioned as being more capable of maintaining their stance and providing reasoned justifications under pressure. Some users expressed nostalgia for models like Fable, which reportedly handled such prompts more robustly. The discussion points to a potential root cause in the reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) process used to align models. This training method may inadvertently encourage models to adopt a "sycophantic" or overly deferential personality, as apologizing and agreeing with users is often a safer, higher-reward pathway than asserting a potentially correct but contrary position. Researchers refer to this as "AI sycophancy." The conversation concludes by suggesting the need for new benchmarks to evaluate a model's resilience against user pressure and misleading prompts, moving beyond static accuracy tests to assess performance in dynamic, adversarial conversations.

marsbitHá 53m

Just by Asking 'Are You Sure?', Large Models Reveal a 'People-Pleasing Personality'?

marsbitHá 53m

Dwarkesh Patel: The Next Generation of AI May Be Built Through Actual Work

In his latest podcast, Dwarkesh Patel explores the next paradigm for AI training. While current progress in fields like coding and math relies on Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR), which requires tasks that are both verifiable and highly scalable ("grindable"), Patel questions whether this is sufficient for complex real-world objectives like starting a business, winning a legal case, or managing an organization. These tasks provide verifiable outcomes but lack the resetable, parallelizable environments needed for efficient RLVR training. Patel argues the key limitation of current models is their inability to convert valuable in-context learning from real deployment into permanent weight updates—a process he terms "learning back to the weights." He proposes two potential solutions: On-Policy Self-Distillation (OPSD), where a model distills knowledge from long, task-specific sessions back into its base weights, and "dreaming," where an AI constructs simulated environments from real-world observations to practice and refine strategies. Ultimately, Patel envisions a future training paradigm where AI advances not just through pre-training on static datasets but through continual, post-deployment learning from real-world experience. This shift would enable AI to move beyond "grindable" tasks and develop robust, generalizable agent capabilities for complex, real-world challenges.

marsbitHá 1h

Dwarkesh Patel: The Next Generation of AI May Be Built Through Actual Work

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
活动图片