Are they? As the article OP shares suggests, these films quietly make us compare our lives to what is portrayed on screen. This is advertisement 101: display people in enviable positions to portray a sense of longing for a lifestyle that one would not normally seek. A food commercial isn't selling you a product, it's trying to make you hungry.
If all you wanted out of these rom coms is the portrayal of a carefree life, you could just watch pharmaceutical, banking, or insurance ads.
Looks like I'm installing Linux tonight.
The problem is the hysteria behind it, leading people to confuse good sounding information with good information. At least when people generally produce information they tend to make an effort to get it right. Machine learning is just an uncaring bullshitting machine, that is rewarded on the basis of the ability to fool people (turns out the Turing test was a crappy benchmark for practice-ready AI besides writing poems), and VC money hasn't reached the "find out" phase of that looming lesson, when we all just get collectively exhausted by how underwhelming the AI fad is.
Just yesterday here on Lemmy, I mentioned the dangers of violating privacy, and some commenters went on about "what dangers?" Implying there were none...
Is it not enough to gesture broadly?
The SCOTUS and other institutions will not save democracy.
This bears repeating. The SCOTUS and other institutions will not save democracy.
Institutions are corruptible. SCOTUS has been corrupted. That is where the US is.
Only citizen action can safeguard democracy.
This wouldn't pass PR review and automated tests, unless they were a senior dev and used elevated privileges to mess with things behind the scenes.
Triple AAA games are usually very polished. But polish doesn't make games fun. Polish is important with accessibility, and it's easy to see why accessibility is important for a big studio casting a wide net.
But fun? That comes from creativity and innovation. Big studios are averse to risk taking, and struggle to attract creative individuals, because the corporate culture seeks to stamp out individuality in the name of process and procedure.
So yeah, more evidence of this. My money is going to Indy devs who prioritize fun over polish. (But polish is good to have too).
3rd party app support...
There are many other reasons, but let's be real. A lot of us ditched reddit because they dropped support for third party apps. Having an interface that isn't trying to constantly milk you for all sorts of monetization schemes matters a lot, as it so happens. Enough to say goodbye to a lot of familiar and large communities with otherwise good information.
In theory, yes. In practice, not necessarily.
I found that the images were not very representative of typical AI art styles I've seen in the wild. So not only would that render preexisting learned queues incorrect, it could actually turn them into obstacles to guessing correctly pushing the score down lower than random guessing (especially if the images in this test are not randomly chosen, but are instead actively chosen to dissimulate typical AI images).
For now I don't think it makes sense to federate large media like videos. The storage costs are just too high to replicate this data all over the place.
The better model I think is to link to content providers with more traditional approach to providing videos. Lemmy is a link aggregator after all, not a media platform.
TBH, I think this was the downfall of Reddit. Reddit had kind of devolved into a cesspit of reactionary videos. Can't say I miss those, sure it was entertaining, but it forms habits of doom scrolling and at the end of the day, I don't want it if it takes shitty business models to support such a service.
Lemmy should stay focused on what made Reddit famous: being the front page of the internet, and honest, raw commenting system to hear from the people.
Did he do the market research, R&D, design, patent application, QA, machine tooling, material resourcing, QC, marketing, sales, technical support, administration, transportation... all on his own too or did he just pull a lever on a machine?
My money's on something closer to the latter. This is a terrible reflection on production and labour costs.
"the hot water isn't working" could be understood to mean "the water in the hot water tap is not hot", but it could also be understood to mean "the water is not flowing out of the hot water tap".
The picture helps clarify the original statement. OP, this interaction is not nearly as bizarre as you make it out to be. It's pretty typical of virtually all support requests. It's incredibly common, when asking for support, that the requester assumes information is obvious when it is in fact not.
The problems start to happen when buisnesses adopt this en masse. Expect all banks to implement this for example. You can use Firefox all you want, but then you won't be able to do online banking.
Standards are really fucking important to help people stay functional in a society. This is one area that the ANCAP mindset just gets it totally wrong, unless you like the idea of being a hermit.
Anyway, we are already seeing some websites basically reject browsers like Firefox because they basically give the consumer too much protection and freedom. Arguably we've seen this before, but this may be a new tier of corporate lockout of open standards as consumer protection gets thrown in the trash. Thanks America.
Lack of graphics settings aren't why I stopped playing. It's the game mechanics. The game isn't that fun for two major immersion breaking reasons.
Lord of the rings comes out
"Oh look, another movie about elves and dwarves."
Who the fuck cares about 10Gbit/s? With data caps, there is nothing I am downloading on a mobile device that is perceptibly faster than downloading it at 1/1000 of that speed
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
Paradoxically (or not), restrictions on selling software is a fundamental violation of freedom. When the OSS movement says free, it means freedom as in free to do what you want, not free as in free beer. Of course, that freedom also includes the freedom to give it away.
So in practice, that usually results in exactly what you lament: free software with a business model on top to support its development and pay programmers so they can eat.
Any reasonable judge will look at this clause and come to the conclusion that Roku is not acting in good faith. It's so blatantly scummy to have a user have to mail in an opt out request on a consumable's EULA update that the consumer never asked for long after the initial purchase.
The reason we shrink heating devices down but not cooling devices is a combined consequence of economics and the laws of thermodynamics.
First an analogy: Making a boat that moves downstream a river is easy. Take any buoyant material like a log or a branch and drop it in water. Presto, you've got a mode of transportation of any size. Want to go upstream? Now you need motors to fight the current. Putting a motor on a large piece of wood, (a boat) is economically viable. Putting one on thousands of sticks? Ain't nobody got time for that.
As a consequence of the laws of thermodynamics, the the universe naturally converts all potential energy (fuel, electricity) into heat. The universe will do this basically on its own, over time, constantly. This is called entropy.
Doing the reverse, taking heat and putting it back into potential energy, i.e. cooling, is difficult. You basically have to pay a price to the universe in some other way, kind of like how a motorboat has to push more water downstream than the current would have naturally moved on it's own. This is what heat pumps (AC, fridge) do. Heat pumps put some of that heat back into potential energy, in exchange for also releasing potential energy into heat... The trick here is to do these two things in different places. The fridge's motor converts some electrical energy into heat in exchange for being able to move some of the heat in the fridge outside of the fridge. The consequence of this is that the room the fridge is in is now hotter. Mostly because you took the heat in the fridge and moved it into the room, but also because the fridge's motor also added some MORE heat to the room in the process in order to fight entropy. So to actually make this useful, you need to insulate what you are cooling (or it will just get warm again, warmer than it was before, because you added heat to the room), and you also want to dispose of the heat in the room. So you pump that out into the atmosphere...
Anyway, long story short, you need insulation, refrigerant, motors, heat changers, lots of power to fight the universe's tendency to spread heat everywhere. Technically you could miniaturize these things, but they become less efficient as you shrink them down, to the point where things smaller than a fridge are just not practical to make compared to the benefit you get from having them.
Making small heating devices is easy. You don't need to fight the universe. You just need an apparatus that will "go with the flow".
Enshitification was coined by Cory Doctrow specifically for the tech space, because the tech space is uniquely poised to constantly shift and tweak a service-based product to manipulate users, creators, and the paying customers.
I call this enshittification, and it is a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a "two sided market," where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, holding each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.
https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/
This is on top of the normal problem of greed. Now I didn't read the article because it is pay walled (go figure). Is this article actually drawing a correct comparison to the definition of enshitification above, or is it just lazily ascribing the phenomenon of greed to that word?
With some exceptions, enthusiasm in technology is in decline in general. We are peaking in terms of rate of progress across the board, from computer speed to smart phone innovation to TV specs. When's the last time ordinary folks got excited about a new phone release? Who cares about a TV larger than 60 inches? It's not like most people can even afford a wall big enough to put it on. Who cares about anything more than 4k on a tiny screen?
Meanwhile, the cost of living is only increasing, and consumer trust in product life support is in decline. Stories about TVs listening to private conversations, or holding your device hostage for forced TOS updates, anti-right to repair, the mountain of e-waste and micro plastics, pervasive DRM, enshitified services, subscription hardware...
Should we be surprised? No.
The only thing that gets me excited about tech any more is repairability and offline/local networking.
Being on the internet used to be not cool.
Email and www. ... .com was as foreign to the mainstream as the Fediverse is to the mainstream today.
The nerds build cool shit, the corporations chase the hot new thing to milk every last dollar out of the mainstream who want the cool new toys, and the mainstream inevitably ruins the cool new toy because they don't understand how or why it was made in the first place.
This is the way of human nature. It has played out on the internet since the start (and probably well before that) and it will probably play out again on the fefiverse (just look at Meta).
The big problem with AI butlers for research is, IMO, stripping out the source takes away important context that helps you decide wether the information you are getting is relevant and appropriate or not. Was the information posted on a parody forum or is it an excerpt from a book by an author with a Ph.D. on the subject? Who knows. The AI is trained to tell you something that you want to hear, not something you ought to hear. It's the same old problem of self selecting information, but magnified 100x fold.
As it turns out, data is just noise without some authority or chain of custody behind it.
Never, ever, ever, ever volunteer personal information, for any reason, on a call you did not initiate, with a number you haven't verified from a trusted source, like a brick and mortar branch, or your online banking account.
Probably the same. This bears repeating: All your information online is and always has been available for others to collect and see, from FBI to advertisers. If you want any amount of protection, it must be with E2E encryption for which you own the keys.
We taught online safety in the 90s. Did we all just collectively forget this in the last two decades?
There are legitimately situations where a meritless person is mooching off of an organization because of corruption (e.g. cronyism, nepotism, abusing union). And then there are situations where a person appears completely incompetent, but has this one unique skill or asset that makes them absolutely invaluable to the company (e.g. savant, schmoozer, someone with connections). It's important to be able to tell them apart.
All that is left is letting people without a watch history default to seeing their subscriptions instead of a blank page. That's the whole point of subscribing: I want my own curated experience. I don't want to watch BS YouTube thinks I want to watch.
It was a mistake letting YouTube decide on behalf of everyone that recommendations was a better experience than letting the users decide for themselves what to watch. The recommendations are no less of an echo chamber. Worse, the recommendations are gamed with churned, garbage content. It's the same problem as google search.
We need a return to form of user-curated content. Down with algorithmic recommendations.
The thing is, chasing individual instances is a game of whack-a-mole, with a lot of downside and not a lot of upside. Established companies follow laws and regulations because they are easy targets, with local assets, offices, and public figures that are worth serving/seizing and can be compelled to comply to court orders. How TF you going to enforce a court order in a country that doesn't recognize your jurisdiction or laws?
The other thing thing is, if you run an instance with moderation rules that skirt the law, you are incentivised not to log personal information and disseminate it because a) that makes you a target, and b) you'll get called out by your own users for logging and leaking IPs, and people will just move to a different server.
It seems pretty obvious to me that you should assume at all times when you are online that you are basically in a public space, like in a public cafe: People can see you, even if the fact that they are not paying close attention to you creates the illusion of privacy. If you start doing something to stand out, people will start to pay attention to you, and it's all visible to see unless you actively take precautions to hide your identity. That starts--but doesn't end--with not browsing piracy on main.
Blocklist and allowlist are much more intuitive, so if we ignore all the cultural baggage, these changes are rather sensical.
Eh. I was on Mastodon for a few days then left. Turns out I don't care to follow specific people. So it's a bit more than the protocol I will chase. The type of interaction also matters a lot.
Of those adversely affected, most have more than eight years of experience at Dell and most are 40–55 year old women, we're told.
I think you are basically arguing that the policy is equal, whereas the article is basically arguing that the policy isn't equity. Two different values. You are not wrong, it's an equal policy. But the article is right in saying that the policy isn't equity.
This article replaces the "Google is cracking down on ad blockers" mantra with "Google is consolidating control by restricting general purpose computing as the model of security".
Honestly, I'm not sure this is a better look. It's true that this is "more secure", in the sense that it limits the power afforded to malicious extensions, but it completely ignores the collateral damage. It strips the power individuals have to enact their own policies, instead having to go through Google to accomplish the same thing.
Honestly, this is just another step in the direction of WebDRM and centralized control. This is more erosion of what made the Internet great. It's just one more step of turning the Internet into a TV set.
Fuck. This. Shit. Give me back web 1.0.
The benefit of AI is overblown for a majority of product tiers. Remember how everything was supposed to be block chain? And metaverse? And web 3.0? And dot.com? This is just the next tech trend for dumb VCs to throw money at.
Ah, the old Reddit Lemmy switcharoo.
You are probably seeing two very different vocal minorities, and conflating the two.
Also, there's a very clear difference in expectations between posting/commenting and upvoting. I blame the UI. We naturally expect public actions to be easily visible. The lack of universal accessibilty to the public data makes people unaware that the data is public. Lemmy UIs, including apps, need to make this information (a list of upvoting users) universally publicly accessible before people will change their expectations.
I'm pretty sure it's accepted pretty universally that countries must accept citizens back. Reason being, if they don't, the rejected person becomes another country's problem, and that is bad for relations.
Software dev is full of obscure keywords that describe otherwise pretty simple or basic concepts you stumble upon in practice naturally and that you probably already understand.
Here's one more of my favourite examples of such a keyword: memoization
Can we, as a society, just move on from that shitty website?
Unfortunately, the US political system does not have a feature to "dislike" all the candidates. Not without a major, probably bloody, revolution, anyway. Your choice is to support and pick one candidate, or let everyone else pick the candidate for you.
They don't. Just like "AI" has been co-opoted to mean "algorithm".
Large groups of humans turn everything they touch into shit.
It's set in 2077. Why the F does it need to feel American? There's enough Americana in media already.