And Romans can’t be homophobic for some reason, or what’s your point?
And Romans can’t be homophobic for some reason, or what’s your point?
Maybe we don’t need to resort to casual homophobia though to criticize corporates
This is not at all relevant to the comment you’re responding to. Your choice of password manager doesn’t change that whatever system you’re authenticating against still needs to have at least a hash of your password. That’s what passkeys are improving on here
You need both ends of the cable connected, so the phone is out. And even on PC, I’m not sure if it would work with the USB drivers in-between the software and the actual ports
Reading the article, it seems like it will actually be opt-in for everyone
Fortran is Proto-Indo-Germanic or whatever it’s called again
The algorithm is actually tailored to find out if/when you fall asleep while watching videos, and then recommends longer videos in autoplay when it believes you are, because they’ll get to play you more ads and cash out more.
You might be misremembering / misinterpreting a little there. This behavior is not intentional, it’s just a side effect of how the algorithm currently works. Showing you longer videos doesn’t equate to showing you more ads. On the contrary, if you get loads of short videos you’ll have way more opportunities to see pre-roll ads, but with longer videos, you’re just to just the mid-roll spots in that video. So YouTube doesn’t really have an incentive to make it work like that, it’s just accidental.
Here’s the spiffing Brit video on this, which I think you might have gotten this idea from: https://youtu.be/8iOjeb5DTZI
Edit: to be clear, I fully agree that YouTube will do anything to shove ads down our throats no matter how effective they actually are. I’m just saying that this example you’ve brought is not really that.
Eh, that’s a bit of a stretch. There’s more awareness by default here because of GDPR and such, but I wouldn’t say people really care that much more here
Congrats, you completely missed the point. Maybe read the actual article, before going on a rant that’s only tangentially related?
It is an algorithm that searches a dataset and when it can’t find something it’ll provide convincing-looking gibberish instead.
This is very misleading. An LLM doesn’t have access to its training dataset in order to “search” it. Producing convincing looking gibberish is what it always does, that’s its only mode of operation. The key is that the gibberish that comes out of today’s models is so convincing that it actually becomes broadly useful.
That also means that no, not everything an LLM produces has to have been in its training dataset, they can absolutely output things that have never been said before. There’s even research showing that LLMs are capable of creating actual internal models of real world concepts, which suggests a deeper kind of understanding than what the “stochastic parrot” moniker wants you to believe.
LLMs do not make decisions.
What do you mean by “decisions”? LLMs constantly make decisions about which token comes next, that’s all they do really. And in doing so, on a higher, emergent level they can make any kind of decision that you ask them to, the only question is how good those decisions are going be, which in turn entirely depends on the training data, how good the model is, and how good your prompt is.
That kind of window has been around for a long time already. Also, let me introduce you to window awnings
Revenge bedtime procrastination is the term you’re looking for. Although I’m not sure that’s actually what the OP is describing
Between 40-60% of people have some form of permanent brain damage and 70-80% have long covid problems
Wait what? I’m with you on masking etc., but those numbers seem a bit high, where did you get those from?
It still protects you from your passwords being compromised in any way except through a compromise of the password manager itself. Yes, it’s worse than keeping them separate, but it’s also still much better than not having 2fa at all.
Don’t know if this is the case here, but the word pedophile refers to someone who is sexually attracted to children, and rapists don’t necessarily have to be attracted to their victims. There can be other motivations at play. So yeah, it’s possible that someone raping a child is not actually a pedophile. Doesn’t make it any less disgusting of course, and I have no clue why anyone thought “but he’s not a pedo” would be a reasonable argument here
Not really. Timezones, at their core (so without DST or any other special rules), are just a constant offset that you can very easily translate back and forth between, that’s trivial as long as you remember to do it. Having lots of them doesn’t really make anything harder, as long as you can look them up somewhere. DST, leap seconds, etc., make shit complicated, because they bend, break, or overlap a single timeline to the point where suddenly you have points in time that happen twice, or that never happen, or where time runs faster or slower for a bit. That is incredibly hard to deal with consistently, much more so that just switching a simple offset you’re operating within.
It depends on where you live. In Germany, forced arbitration in general TOS is invalid and has to be separately negotiated and agreed to. In general, what you can put into your TOS is pretty restricted, anything you put in there that a consumer wouldn’t reasonably expect is not gonna be legally binding.
You’re not wrong, but the way you put it makes it sound a little bit too intentional, I think. It’s not like the camera sees infrared light and makes a deliberate choice to display it as purple. The camera sensor has red, green and blue pixels, and it just so happens that these pixels are receptive to a wider range of the light spectrum than the human eye equivalent, including some infrared. Infrared light apparently triggers the pixels in roughly the same way that purple light does, and the sensor can’t distinguish between infrared light and light that actually appears purple to humans, so that’s why it shows up like that. It’s just an accidental byproduct of how camera sensors work, and the budgetary decision to not include an infrared filter in the lens to prevent it from happening.
I think if we are going to support the idea of an open web, we need to be consistent about it.
Not convinced. This feels like the paradox of tolerance in slightly different shape.
So anal sex is a not-good way to have sex? Yeah sorry but that does sound pretty homophobic to me.
Ah, well that changes things. Anal without lube is a pretty universally bad experience, so sure, use that. But just framing being the receiving end of anal as bad without further context, we can do better than that, that’s all im saying