CeeBee_Eh
@CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
- Comment on Google is intentionally throttling YouTube videos, slowing down users with ad blockers 1 week ago:
YT’s blocked on it.
Just tried it. It works.
- Comment on A 3-tonne, $1.5 billion satellite to watch Earth’s every move is set to launch this week 1 week ago:
And yet whenever some achievement is made, the headlines are “Musk achieves great feat”
- Comment on Half of companies planning to replace customer service with AI are reversing course 2 weeks ago:
Not at all. It’s not “how likely is the next word to be X”. That wouldn’t be context.
I’m guessing you didn’t watch the video.
- Comment on Half of companies planning to replace customer service with AI are reversing course 2 weeks ago:
I’m not wrong. There’s mountains of research demonstrating that LLMs encode contextual relationships between words during training.
There’s so much more happening beyond “predicting the next word”. This is one of those unfortunate “dumbing down the science communication” things. It was said once and now it’s just repeated non-stop.
If you really want a better understanding, watch this video:
And before your next response starts with “but Apple…”
Their paper has had many holes poked into it already. Also, it’s not a coincidence their paper released just before their WWDC event which had almost zero AI stuff in it. They flopped so hard on AI that they even have class action lawsuits against them for their false advertising. In fact, it turns out that a lot of their AI demos from last year were completely fabricated and didn’t exist as a product when they announced them. Even some top Apple people only learned of those features during the announcements.
Apple’s paper on LLMs is completely biased in their favour.
- Comment on Half of companies planning to replace customer service with AI are reversing course 2 weeks ago:
it just repeats things which approximate those that have been said before.
That’s not correct and over simplifies how LLMs work. I agree with the spirit of what you’re saying though.
- Comment on Jeff Geerling: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful (updated). Youtube removed his content, saying that self hosting content is "dangerous or harmful content" 2 weeks ago:
It’s been talked about to death. It’s been analysed to death.
But here’s a very detailed and thorough breakdown:
- Comment on Jeff Geerling: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful (updated). Youtube removed his content, saying that self hosting content is "dangerous or harmful content" 2 weeks ago:
Lied
- Comment on Jeff Geerling: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful (updated). Youtube removed his content, saying that self hosting content is "dangerous or harmful content" 2 weeks ago:
He’s on float plane
I’ll never support anyone on that platform. I’ll never do anything to give LTT a cent.
- Comment on Why Denmark is dumping Microsoft Office and Windows for LibreOffice and Linux 2 weeks ago:
The funny thing about that story, and the outset that no one covered after the fact, is that Munich reversed direction again and ultimately did go with Linux and open source stacks.
- Comment on Disney and Universal Sue A.I. Firm for Copyright Infringement 2 weeks ago:
This is corporate AI against open source AI.
Show me where I can download Midjourneys full model to run it locally and then we can agree to call it “open weights”. Unless their base model and training data is also available, it’s not open source.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
I think you were projecting with that “you’re insane” comment.
I have no idea what you’re trying to say this time. Maybe have a lie down?
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
Well according to the doc that’s not a concern unless the same force is applied again.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
Learning’s hard, eh?
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
though they need to be in a sling.
Not true, my son got nurse maid’s elbow. He was crying almost non-stop for 5 hours between it happening to the doctor walking into the doctor’s room. The instant the doctor manipulated his arm he stopped crying and it was like nothing happened.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
Yup, that’s called nurse maid’s elbow. It’s incredibly common. It’s almost always caused by a kid trying to yank themselves away. And it happens because at that young the tendons aren’t strong enough to hold that amount of weight/tension.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
Instead I do a lot of yelling / stern vocalizations to keep kids away from areas they shouldn’t be.
It’s a natural instinct to convey urgency of danger. It works for adults but it can be damaging to kids.
The truth is that in a life or death situation, you do whatever you need to do to keep kids safe.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
My vote is that you’re lying about being a parent. But if you are a parent, then you’re letting social pressures and some very strange and warped perception of things limit what you do as a parent to protect your kids.
I won’t outright say that it makes you a “bad” parent, but I personally cannot fathom not taking every step I can to protect my child. And no, a leash doesn’t limit their development. It factually promotes it on the very basis that it allows them to be more active in walking around and exploring in situations where it would be unthinkable to let a child walk around (heights, dangerous areas, on a boat, large dense crowds, etc.).
Being stuck in a stroller 99% of the time is awful for kids that want to run around and explore. Some parents don’t have the physical strength or ability to carry a kid all the time.
Twins or even triplets that are very active and wild are a perfect example. You will never contain two very wild toddlers by just “watching them”. And if you try, you are a bad parent.
Ultimately you choose a very dumb him to die on. You are wrong.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
Good on your mom! And glad you were safe!
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
children are people
Very good! I’d give you a sticker, but I don’t know where you live.
insulating them from small forms of possible harm doesn’t help their development.
And a leash doesn’t do that. Being a hover parent does.
if you pick a reasonable place for your child to play there’s no need for a fucking leash 99% of the time.
What? Is that how you people think using a leash works? You think a leash is put on the child in the morning and isn’t taken off until the end of the day? Are you for real with that? Forget it, you don’t get a sticker for saying the dumbest thing I’ve heard today. And I’ve already watched a video about a flat earther.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
I find it very interesting that you have absolutely equated a leash with a pet and with degradation.
I have a cat, he’s not on a leash. Is he my child now? Or does that just mean he’s *not" my pet?
dogs are on a leash mostly for safety reasons for others.
That’s not entirely true. For example, dogs don’t understand traffic and that running across a street is dangerous (well, most dogs. Some dogs are just very smart). Keeping them on a leash minimizes the chance that it darts across the street because it sees something it wants to get. The owner put the dog on a leash because they understand that doing so will keep the dog safe from injury. The owner recognizes that the dog doesn’t understand the dangers involved.
An infant also doesn’t understand (can’t understand) the dangers. Putting them on a leash protects them from that danger. But it also helps the child develop independence, helps them exercise, helps them learn to walk better, helps their mental development from being able to explore and interact with the world.
Compared to just being carried or stuck in a stroller, which is ultimately boring and doesn’t help at all with the motor skills, and is far less impactful with mental development as they can only observe and not interact with.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
This is mostly copied from my reply to another comment:
Parents get tired. In fact, most parents have chronic levels of sleep deprivation which impairs things like concentration, reflexes, ability to pay attention, etc. Then you have parents who might be working multiple jobs, be dealing with health issues that affect sleep, etc. A leash would make that job to keep kids safe much easier.
No leash equals a non-abusive, even though not every situation can allow a parent to keep 100% focus on the child, but using a leash the parent suddenly becomes abusive?
Should a parent not give the kid a helmet when learning to ride a bike then also? Does using a helmet mean the parent is abusive?
I just don’t understand this. I cannot fathom that someone would criticize a thing that objectively and provably make life in the world safer for children. It’s just another tool to help kids get to grow up.
There are countless stories of children just walking away in the 3 to 5 seconds a parent looks away where the child falls off a height, falls into water (not every parent can swim, and not all waters are swimable), gets picked up by a stranger in a crowd, etc. Situations that a leash would 100% have saved the child’s life.
And when these people are confronted on why it’s abusive or “embarrassing for the child”, they don’t have an answer.
They might say something out of left field like “children aren’t dogs!”, to which I say “yes, you’re right. Children aren’t dogs. Very good! Now about the leash, why is it abusive?”
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
I’ve met too many people like this.
Your kid is having an issue with something? “Well my kids never did that!” But said in a snide way that implies you’re doing something wrong.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
Again, it’s humiliating for children
A two year old didn’t get embarrassed.
as parent it’s you fucking job to Look after your offspring.
Parents get tired. In fact, most parents have chronic levels of sleep deprivation which impairs things like concentration, reflexes, ability to pay attention, etc. Then you have parents who might be working multiple jobs, be feeding with health issues that affect sleep, etc. A leash would make that job to keep kids safe much easier.
And I’m not sure how it works in your mind. No leash equals the parent keeping the kid safe, even though not every situation can allow a parent to keep 100% focus on the child, but using a leash the parent suddenly isn’t paying attention?
How do you think that works?
Should a parent not give the kid a helmet when learning to ride a bike then also? Does using a helmet mean the parent isn’t keeping the kid safe?
I’d like to know your thoughts on not utilizing safety equipment with children. I’m very curious.
A leash will not Help you, when you are on the phone and the children runs into danger.
Do you… do you not understand how a leash works?
- Comment on [deleted] 5 weeks ago:
but If you are putting children on a leash, you are mostly seen as a bad parent and probably you are.
100% you aren’t a parent.
I’ve never put a leash on my kid because I didn’t frequent extremely busy crowds. But leashes are great for kids. It gives them the feeling of self autonomy to explore, while keeping them safe.
Anyone who says they’re bad has never experienced turning your back for 0.68 seconds and then realizing your kid is already gone off somewhere. They are fast.
- Comment on We have reached the “severed fingers and abductions” stage of the crypto revolution - Ars Technica 1 month ago:
So the guys on the street that scam tourists are high profile scammers?
- Comment on We have reached the “severed fingers and abductions” stage of the crypto revolution - Ars Technica 1 month ago:
I did acknowledge that it’s not exclusive to the US. And I didn’t say “it is”, I said “it feels like”.
FTX, Theranos, Fyre Festival, Enron, Bernie Madoff, Logan Paul’s CrytoZoo, Charles Ponzi (the OG Ponzi scammer), etc.
While scams exist everywhere, the US seems specially suited to embolden people to run scams. At least high profile ones.
- Comment on We have reached the “severed fingers and abductions” stage of the crypto revolution - Ars Technica 1 month ago:
It’s a whole hell of a lot harder to rig when your name is everywhere when you win.
This also sounds like a uniquely US problem. Not that there aren’t scammers everywhere, but it feels like it would be more prevalent in the US.
- Comment on That's all folks, Plex is starting to charge for sharing 1 month ago:
Plex (originally) and Jellyfin are a centralized way of managing your media with aesthetic and easy to use interfaces. I have one Jellyfin server and I have a Netflix/Display+ type interaction with my media. I have the same content on my phone, wife’s phone, my desktop, laptop, my TV, etc.
All watch history, recommendations, up next queue, and so on.
And with the right setup (Wireguard in my case) I can access that content from anywhere.
- Comment on Hundreds of smartphone apps are monitoring users through their microphones 1 month ago:
You are the one basing your argument on an article from 2008 , not me.
… what? You literally linked the article from Android Authority, not me.
You are completely deranged.
Says the person claiming a model’s computational power usage scales with the number of classes trained.
Now come back with some hard evidence
Hard evidence for what? I’ve never once claimed phones are listening to people’s conversations. This whole thread has been about the technical viability of such a system. Not evidence of it’s literal existence.
You, on the other hand, have spewed nonsense this whole time.
So like I’ve said more than once, come back with something real or stay in your lane.
- Comment on Hundreds of smartphone apps are monitoring users through their microphones 1 month ago:
I already did multiple times
No you didn’t, because you keep saying wrong things.
you just refuse to read it
I don’t need to read it, because I read it when it came out… back in 2008. I read their stuff regularly. I also read all the other stuff about this topic (AI tech). An article from 2008 is irrelevant at this point. Technology has advanced leaps and bounds in 17 years. AI wasn’t even a thing back then. Things like Picovoice didn’t even exist until recently.
It also says a lot that your source of truth is a near 20-year old article from Android Authority.
How often do you say Nike ?
Personally? Never.
More interesting would be “I will buy a pair of new shoes” now shoes can be mentioned in tons of context so you better have a way of separate it.
I don’t know about “interesting”, but I do agree that it would be much greater context to better target ads. But that’s not what the discussion was about. I said way back that I’m not positioning this idea of phone’s listening as an absolute certainty. My whole point was that at a technological level it’s well within technical means to accomplish the whole “our phones listen to what we say” all while not draining the battery enough to be outright noticeable.
Another thing to note, is that most (if not all) of the anecdotal stories about people talking about a topic and then seeing ads about that thing are often generic conversations. Even in my own tests, which are anecdotal, confirm that. I never talk about boating. I never search anything about boats. I also never saw any ads about boats. Etc. So I did a little test on my own recently and openly talked about “getting the boat ready”, “can’t wait to go boating next week”, “need to get the boat in the water and ready for the season”, and so on. I did this for about an hour solid. Then waited and hour and visited some generic websites that show ads, and lo and behold there were lots of ads for buying a new propeller, ads for nearby marinas, ads for marina supply shops, ads for boating accessories, and so on.
Like I said, it’s entirely anecdotal and in no way conclusive, but it does lead me to believe that there might be truth to the rumours. And it’s the kind of thing I’ve heard from many other technical people who deliberately tried to trigger ads on topics they never deal with otherwise.
And also like I said before either come back with something real, or go away and concede you’re out of your depth.