Wait like as opposed to before today? Today’s release is moving 4.3 from experimental branch to the long-term stable branch (or whatever they call it)

Cringe

I think the saving grace of the Internet is in the small holes that arent populated enough for these big actors to care about. If you’re influencing a nation, you probably aren’t going to inject your AI slop into a tiny proboards or like the forum on Gaia Online.

What’s the traffic on invidious? Like, while I don’t necessarily agree with the ad-block-block, the profit motive makes sense given their ubiquity. But are there really enough users of alternate YouTube frontends that Google is capturing any meaningful profit? Especially when developer hours are expensive and could be used elsewhere on more valuable projects?

BBB is a scam

“This image was generated anywhere between 3 and 3 million years ago by an AI”

Right, I recall news from years ago where a bunch of celebrities’ very private photos backed up to iCloud were leaked. They may or may not have known they uploaded those to iCloud, I dunno. But imagine what’s up there if you don’t realize you’re doing a backup. Not just photos, but like scanned documents with vulnerable information. And all that personal info in a centralized server is a big ol honeypot for a malicious actor.

It’s not hard to see why this is a vulnerability, is what I’m getting at.

I would question the efficiency claim. Uber and the like claimed incredible market dominance, driving local food delivery and taxi services out of business. They’re only now really being forced to find profitability.

I wonder if AI is going to be similar. The powerful models right now, as I understand it, have ludicrous power requirements. I don’t know their balance sheets, but in the current race to market share, I’m skeptical that most of these services are in the green.

What that ultimately says about the future I don’t really know. Like it could be we reach some point where the models get better, or more specialized, or something and profit arrive. Or maybe theres a point of diminishing returns where the profit just can’t be made, and once the hype falls off (and investors stop clamoring for AI) these companies will ask what they’re getting for the money spent.

(And of course I could just be straight up wrong about profits today not being there.)

It comes from the case against Henry Ford after he saw his company was making gobs of cash and decided to give some of that to his employees. Shareholders successfully sued him to stop this on the grounds that he has a fiduciary duty to shareholders.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

As with anything legal, there is nuance, but the basic assertion that there is fiduciary duty to shareholders is not wrong.

You really can. Right to work, + free speech is only applicable wrt the government.

The fact that it’s legal does not make it moral.

Not the person you responded to, but: left economically is not left socially.

Also, it’s cheap to speak total bullshit, but it takes time, effort, and energy, to dispel it. I can say the moon is made of cheese, you can’t disprove that. And you can go out and look up an article about the samples of moon rock we have and the composition, talk about the atmosphere required to give rise to dairy producing animals and thus cheese.

And I can just come up with some further bullshit that’ll take another 30 minutes to an hour to debunk.

If we gave equal weight to every argument, we’d spend our lives mired in fact-checking hell holes. Sometimes, you can just dismiss someone’s crap.

Do you? Genuinely, not trying to snark. I see this point lots, but Im skeptical that people actually do.

As a dev, I read plenty of commits, and the idea of voluntarily prodding through commits on a FOSS project is just not happening. I’d rather just trust the dev, and the community to pick through the code in my place. The obvious issue being, what if everyone also does that.

I can’t speak for the original commented, but I’m personally quite tired of the thin veneer that’s slapped into these statements. I would prefer a company just be honest and talk about the profit incentives. They want people using the free version to please pay for the expensive one.

For my experience, I still retain the general irritation at product quality going down regardless of how they word it. But now I’m also annoyed that MS isn’t being straightforward about it.

They were never giving it away. They included wordpad with your purchase of windows. They no longer do. I don’t think anyone is saying that windows is not “within their rights”, they’re saying that this degrades the product we already pay for. That is worth complaining about, even if our ultimate recourse primarily ends up being to find an OS that better serves our needs.

Honestly though I’m struggling to understand why you’d think that’s about Microsoft’s rights to begin with??

Yikes

deleted by creator

Yup, it’s why O(N+10) and even O(2N) are effectively the same as O(N) on your CS homework. Speaking too generally, once you’re dithering over the efficiency of an algorithm processing a 100-item dataset you’ve probably gone too far in weeds. And optimizations can often lead to messy code for not a lot of return.

That’s mostly angled at new grads (or maybe just at me when I first started). You’ve probably got bigger problems to solve than shaving a few ms from the total runtime of your process.

The problem breaks down into a few broad sub problems, as I see it.

1. Confirming the reviewer or voter is who they say they are (to prevent one entity from making multiple reviews).
2. Confirming the reviewer or voter is a valid stakeholder. This is domain-specific, but can be such metrics as “citizen of country”, or “verified purchaser”.
3. Confirming the intent of the reviewer. This meaning people who were paid off (buyers who are offered a gift card for a positive review, which happens plenty on Amazon), or discounting review bombs when a game “goes woke”.

1 and 2 have solutions. Steam cares about whether you’re a verified purchaser, and the barrier to entry of “1 purchase of a game per vote” is certainly enough to make things harder to bot. Amazon might be able to do the same, but so much of the transaction happens outside their purview that a foolproof system would be hard. Not that it’s in their interest to do so, though.

For places like Reddit or Lemmy, verifying one human per up vote is going to be impossible. New accounts are cheap and easy as a core function of the product. bot detection is only going to get harder, too.

If you used some centralized certificate system (like SSL certs), you could maybe get as granular as one vote per machine, but not without massive privacy invasions. The government does this for voting kinda, but we make a point to keep those private identifiers the government gives private.

Oh!! Awesome, thanks!

I’ve only watched recently without trying to build much myself for ML. I have the hardware but idk if I want to leave my bulky gaming machine on regularly just to run ML operations. Having a more dedicated piece of hardware to handle it makes the idea much more attractive to me.

Now I just have to learn everything. And then learn how to integrate a locally hosted TPU into the process.