joe
@joe@lemmy.world
Sorry about that.
- Comment on The Batshit Crazy Story Of The Day Elon Musk Decided To Personally Rip Servers Out Of A Sacramento Data Center 1 year ago:
Well, that’s a good point but I still think there are better services than Twitter/microblogging for that. Like our old friend RSS
- Comment on The Batshit Crazy Story Of The Day Elon Musk Decided To Personally Rip Servers Out Of A Sacramento Data Center 1 year ago:
Sure, but you can get that with someone more long-form, too; it’s not exclusive to Twitter.
- Comment on The Batshit Crazy Story Of The Day Elon Musk Decided To Personally Rip Servers Out Of A Sacramento Data Center 1 year ago:
I would argue that the format incentives short quips and discussions lacking nuance in favor of brevity, and yes, therefore it’s “bad” (to use their term) to use Twitter even if musk wasn’t turning it into Truth Social.
- Comment on The Batshit Crazy Story Of The Day Elon Musk Decided To Personally Rip Servers Out Of A Sacramento Data Center 1 year ago:
Well, arguably the microblogging format does have some intrinsic disadvantages.
- Comment on Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work 1 year ago:
Are you speaking legally or morally when you say someone “aught” to do something?
- Comment on Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work 1 year ago:
You most certainly can. The discussion about whether copyright applies to the output is nuanced but certainly valid, and notably separate from whether copyright allows copyright holders to restrict who or what gets trained on their work after it’s released for general consumption.
- Comment on Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work 1 year ago:
The article is literally about someone suing to prevent their art from being used for training. That’s the topic at hand.
Are you confused, or are you trying to shoehorn a different but related discussion into this one?
- Comment on Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work 1 year ago:
I was under the impression we were talking about using copyright to prevent a work from being used to train a generative model. There’s nothing in copyright that says anything about training anything. I’m not even convinced there should be.
- Comment on Visual artists fight back against AI companies for repurposing their work 1 year ago:
There’s nothing in copyright law that covers this scenario, so anyone that says it’s “obviously” one way or the other is telling you an opinion, not a fact.
- Comment on [Spoiler Warning: Baldurs Gate 3] Karlach romance 1 year ago:
My first playthrough was the same thing, but I think it’s because I picked her up so late in Act 1. I have no actual data but I think that if you don’t have a certain level of approval with her when you
spoiler about Karlach's side quest
have her heart tuned the first time
you miss out on romancing her for the rest of the game. For my playthrough, I basically picked her up, and started progressing through her quest immediately, and already that the item needed to finish her act 1 storyline; I think that’s what locked me out. Again, I’m just speculating, though.
- Comment on Is America Really That Bad? 1 year ago:
Dude you’re not going to get through this with shitty wordplay. They did in fact lose a US constitutional right. This isn’t a debatable statement, it is a fact.
What is your end game here?
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
You don’t think there is a camera aimed at the register?
- Comment on Is America Really That Bad? 1 year ago:
It is true that 50% of the population lost this constitutional right.
- Comment on Is America Really That Bad? 1 year ago:
I mean, case in point: someone replied to my post apparently not knowing abortion is banned in places in America. I don’t even understand how that’s possible it was everywhere on the news for months.
- Comment on Is America Really That Bad? 1 year ago:
You skipped over the whole 50% of the population lost the constitutional right to control their own body.
You skipped over a lot of stuff.
America is pretty bad, and we’ll never get better if everyone keeps insisting we’re not that bad.
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
Yes, except you give that card to all sorts of people, right? So it is really private? Identifying, yes, but private?
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
I’m sorry but I’m not following your point. I’m questioning whether the info on a license is really “private info”. I am not suggesting that people be forced to give Twitter their ID
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
That’s not any working definitely of private information I’ve ever seen.
We’re talking about privacy in the context of information security.
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
I think this may be closer to the reality of the situation. It’s not so much that IDs are private, it’s that people want their Twitter (X?) account to be anonymous.
I get that. My username on Twitter was my real name so I kinda messed that up right away. I didn’t really use it though.
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
But your SSN is private and you shouldn’t give it out or show it except in very rare instances.
What information on a driver’s license is private? Your address? Your eye color? Your birthday?
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
Sure, but if they’re not really private information, then what is the concern? It seems to function similarly to an email address, kinda? Something I’d really rather not be shown to the public but also something I’m giving out to the public all the time.
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
Well, DoB and the picture. Are those other data fields considered private?
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
Yet you show them to the minimum wage earner before buying alcohol, or let a bouncer scan it before getting into a club? That doesn’t seem like something you’d need to do with private information.
- Comment on X is working on ID verification, what’s next? 1 year ago:
I’ve never really considered it before. Should IDs be considered private information, or public information?
- Comment on Cruise robotaxi finds itself stuck in wet concrete in San Francisco 1 year ago:
they’re demonstrably not
Wait… how did you arrive at this conclusion? Humans do this kind of thing all the time, too. You’d have to know the relative rates of accidents and mishaps to say with any confidence that they’re “demonstrably” not better than humans.
- Comment on YouTube and Reddit are sued for allegedly enabling the racist mass shooting in Buffalo that left 10 dead 1 year ago:
Well, maybe. I want to be up-front that I haven’t read the actual lawsuit, but it seems from the article is that the claim is that youtube and reddit both have an algorithm that helped radicalize him:
YouTube, named with parent companies Alphabet Inc. and Google, is accused of contributing to the gunman’s radicalization and helping him acquire information to plan the attack. Similarly, the lawsuits claim Reddit promoted extreme content and offered a specialized forum relating to tactical gear.
I’d say that case is worth pursuing. It’s long been known that social media companies tune their algorithms to increase engagement, and that pissed off people are more likely to engage. This results in algorithms that output content that makes people angry, by design, and that’s a choice these companies make, not “delivering search results”.
- Comment on Turns out that technology is NOT harmful to kids 1 year ago:
It’s the point Douglas Adams was making with this quote:
I’ve come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
- Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
- Anything that’s invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
- Anything invented after you’re thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
This is exactly how these moral panics go. It’s always relatively to the world the person grew up in.
- Comment on ChatGPT has a style over substance trick that seems to dupe people into thinking it's smart, researchers found 1 year ago:
A caveat: This user analysis involved just 12 programmers being asked to assess if they prefer the responses of ChatGPT or those written by humans on Stack Overflow to 2,000 randomly sampled questions.
Nothing to see here.
- Comment on If Google succeeds with the new DRM policy, will that affect functionality of browsers like firefox which uses a different engine? 1 year ago:
I’m not sure this is true (keep in mind: weak grasp). This 10% would push websites from specifically blocking untrusted clients-- but if they got rid of the 5%, it would not magically change all the websites to block untrusted clients. They’d still need to update to do this.
I don’t want to come off like I’m defending this though-- I really just don’t know enough to say.
- Comment on If Google succeeds with the new DRM policy, will that affect functionality of browsers like firefox which uses a different engine? 1 year ago:
I mean, the same thing that is happening right now, right? The point would be that websites would not be built to only allow trusted clients-- it would still have to allow all clients. If they wanted to remove this 10% thing, it’s not like the entire web would instantly stop being built to allow untrusted clients.