schnurrito
@schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
- Comment on Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe 1 hour ago:
The UK government decided in 2022 not to amend the Gambling Act 2005 to include loot boxes, saying no evidence showed a “causative link” to harms.
Since when is that something that stopped the UK government from trying to regulate technology and curtail its citizens’ digital freedoms?
- Submitted 1 hour ago to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk | 0 comments
- Comment on System76 fighting for open source being excluded from Colorado age checks 2 days ago:
As much as I like open source software, I do not think that these kinds of bills are legitimate even for closed source software.
- Submitted 2 days ago to xkcd@lemmy.world | 1 comment
- Submitted 2 days ago to technology@lemmy.zip | 0 comments
- Comment on What differentiates Lemmy, Kbin, Mbin, and PieFed? 2 days ago:
They’re different but compatible pieces of software.
A major difference is that Lemmy doesn’t allow following individual (microblogging) accounts, only communities. The other three allow following both AFAIK.
- Comment on Introducing New Fediverse Software, Goofed v0.0.1, Minimum Viable Shitpost Edition 3 days ago:
Is the source code already available?
- Comment on Pete Hegseth is a TERRIBLE advertisement for writing all of your speeches with AI. 3 days ago:
I would have copy-pasted it verbatim no matter what the output would have been, didn’t know what it would be before. :D
- Comment on Pete Hegseth is a TERRIBLE advertisement for writing all of your speeches with AI. 3 days ago:
I didn’t even tell ChatGPT what the contents should be, I just told it to write a public speech about your initial showerthought, didn’t give it any instructions what it should or shouldn’t say.
In fact I agree with you that it ended up as an ironic illustration of what AI writing is like at its worst.
- Comment on Pete Hegseth is a TERRIBLE advertisement for writing all of your speeches with AI. 3 days ago:
Ladies and gentlemen,
Today I want to talk about something many people are excited about: artificial intelligence. AI can help us write emails, summarize reports, generate ideas, and yes—draft speeches. It’s a powerful tool. But like any powerful tool, it reveals something important about us: technology can assist judgment, but it cannot replace it.
That brings me to a very public example: Pete Hegseth.
If you’ve been paying attention to recent public discourse, you may have seen speeches and statements associated with him that sparked debate—not just about the content itself, but about how they may have been written. Many people suspect that AI tools were involved. And when those speeches fall flat, contradict themselves, or sound oddly mechanical, critics jump to one conclusion: “AI wrote this.”
But here’s the truth we should understand: bad speeches are not a failure of AI. They’re a failure of the human using it.
AI can generate structure, language, and ideas, but it cannot replace authenticity, judgment, or responsibility. A strong speech comes from clarity of thought, understanding of the audience, and a genuine message. If someone simply copies and pastes machine-generated words without reflection, editing, or ownership, the result will sound hollow—no matter how advanced the technology is.
So when people say that certain speeches are a “terrible advertisement for AI,” they’re actually pointing to something deeper. AI doesn’t stand at a podium. AI doesn’t decide what values to defend or what message to send. Humans do.
The lesson isn’t that AI makes communication worse. The lesson is that AI magnifies the communicator.
A thoughtful speaker can use AI to research faster, refine language, and test ideas. A careless speaker will use it as a shortcut—and the audience will hear that shortcut immediately.
Public speech has always required responsibility. The tools change—typewriters, teleprompters, word processors, and now AI—but the core requirement remains the same: the speaker must mean what they say.
So instead of blaming the technology when a speech fails, we should remember a simple principle:
AI can help you write words. But it cannot help you believe them.
And the audience always knows the difference.
Thank you.
(sorry, I can’t resist replying to posts like that with AI-generated examples of what they’re complaining about; in this case, the above was generated by ChatGPT)
- Comment on "US Person": is a red flag for financial institutions in Europe 3 days ago:
AFAIK this has to do with US tax law and how it applies to income earned by US citizens abroad.
I have never answered yes to this, but would be surprised if it were impossible or even considerably harder for US persons to open bank accounts. I always thought this just triggered slightly different rules for the bank?
- Submitted 3 days ago to xkcd@lemmy.world | 19 comments
- Comment on [deleted] 3 days ago:
What do you expect when everything you post is instantly copied (“federated”) to something between dozens and thousands of other servers? They might not all properly process any deletions. :/
- Comment on [deleted] 3 days ago:
That link doesn’t work for me, and I’m pretty sure that’s generally how Lemmy works, you yourself can still see things you deleted on your profile, but other people can’t. Try opening your profile logged out (e.g. private browsing mode), I think you won’t see deleted posts or comments there anymore.
- Comment on [deleted] 3 days ago:
If you don’t trust deletion to federate to other instances, why would you trust edits to do so?
- Comment on A happy consequence should be called a prosequence 6 days ago:
wait until you find out what the opposite of progress is
- Comment on System76 on Age Verification Laws 6 days ago:
Alright, I agree with you that modern “social media recommendation algorithms” are a bad thing that shouldn’t have been invented, if that is what you’re getting at.
- Comment on System76 on Age Verification Laws 6 days ago:
I definitely agree with all of that.
But if you “learned the shortcuts to hide” what you were doing, then you were clearly accessing things you actively wanted to see, which was my entire point.
- Comment on System76 on Age Verification Laws 6 days ago:
OK, if someone actively links me to it, then yes, but there’s also no solution to that because they could just send it (or a screenshot of it) directly to me and circumvent any filters there might be.
I’ve never clicked on a “hot singles in your area” ad, so no idea what that is about.
The entire Internet is of course IMHO about exploring and pursuing novel experiences; but how quickly do you imagine children can get from websites actively recommended by parents to shocking websites? Not very, I think?
- Comment on System76 on Age Verification Laws 1 week ago:
even I have been somewhat traumatized by accessing graphic content I shouldn’t have
Why did you access it if it made you feel bad? It is (and has been since I remember) very difficult to accidentally run across anything shocking on the Internet.
- Comment on 1 week ago:
I realize that, academically.
I feel that what I am buying with a lottery ticket is a few days of allowing myself to imagine what my life might be like if I win.
And I invest vastly more of my money than I buy in lottery tickets.
- Submitted 1 week ago to technology@lemmy.zip | 56 comments
- Comment on 1 week ago:
… they are in my country, at least for people who want to attend a university.
I realize myself that the lottery is a tax on lack of statistical knowledge. I still occasionally play it because if I don’t play, then the probability of winning (and never having to work for money again) is 0, and I can easily afford to occasionally buy a lottery ticket.
- Submitted 1 week ago to technology@lemmy.zip | 4 comments
- Australia will consider requiring app stores to block AI services without age verificationwww.engadget.com ↗Submitted 1 week ago to australia@aussie.zone | 1 comment
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
“Fediverse content” is absolutely indexed by Google, like everything else on the public web. Why would Google choose to ignore it just because it is from the fediverse?
But it usually doesn’t show up very prominently, and which instances’ copies do show up can be completely unpredictable. Probably the search built into fediverse software is more useful if you want to specifically search here.
- California’s AB 1043 Could Regulate Every Linux Command, and the Open Source World Is Too Quietshujisado.org ↗Submitted 1 week ago to technology@lemmy.zip | 2 comments
- Comment on Ubuntu and Fedora devs comment on California's new Digital Age Assurance Act 1 week ago:
I’ve previously written that they should just challenge this in court because distributing operating systems is distributing software, is distributing information, is protected as freedom of speech.
What I wonder is why we are only hearing very much about this now that the law has already passed the legislature and been signed into law? Would not the right time have been before those things happened?
- Comment on The Nuremberg Trials 2.0 will see 'generative AI' used as an excuse in the same way some tried 'just following orders' as an excuse after WWII 1 week ago:
It is German, but the video seems to have a translation into English too (also French) which you can access through the cogwheel menu.
- Submitted 1 week ago to xkcd@lemmy.world | 8 comments