Pup Biru

this is actually the way it works in australia: downloading content is not illegal; sharing content is illegal

thus as a consumer, usenet is fine

obligatory ianal

did they ever clear up that random unexplained binaries issue?

gimme an advanced advanced mode that mimicks the uMatrix UI and i’d donate monthly for sure - uMatrix is one of my most used tools! i’d switch to uBO if the UI were as powerful

i’ve tried using dynamic filtering before, but honestly the UI for it is horrible… their example they give for allowing youtube embeds shows my issue with it pretty well:

their solution is either to allow everything from google.com and youtube.com, or to allow all 3rd party frames

uMatrix allows me to, for example, allow 3rd party frames only from youtube.com, and block cookies for those same frames (heck you could even allow frames and block CSS originating from google if that worked!)

this is particularly useful for analytics services… sometimes the whole page won’t load if an analytics script doesn’t load, so you can allow only scripts and block xhr so it can’t send pings back home

you’re welcome! you too!

it should be noted though that it hasn’t been updated since 2021, and its repo has been archived (i’m not sure of the reasons). it still works great, but it’s not going to get any updates

I’m not aware of any international organizations simply just accepting the new name

that’s exactly the point: there are international bodies that name these things. the arrogance of all of this is astounding. the US president doesn’t get to just snap his fingers and have the world say “yes mr president” and bow down to it…

gulf of america

is

not

it’s

name

the problem is not with the change: the problem is with the implementation… we have international organisations that manage things like place names, and the president of the US doesn’t have the authority to just go ahead and change an internationally agreed upon thing. in the US? perhaps… but it’s bat shit insane that globally we now see both names. it’s like trump saying everything globally has to default to fahrenheit and feet and google etc just complying without question

but also, as other commenters have mentioned: there’s no real issue with the original name; it’s just nationalism and racism that triggered the change

i use uMatrix (by the same author as uBlock Origin), which essentially allows very granular control over what dynamic content to allow:

per domain and subdomain you can allow script, xhr, media, frames, cookies, images, css, and other things

so you can say, for example, on lemm.ee deny any scripts from google.com from loading and deny any xhr (so analytics can’t work even if the script is hosted on the sites own domain)

this stops a lot of fingerprinting in its tracks (except when you need to allow eg reCAPTCHA), but it does break pretty much every website until you go and allow only known good things (like scripts and xhr to the sites own domain)

there’s also server-side fingerprinting, which is harder again

i think it’s also incorrect: the basic premise of arch is minimally configured, do whatever you like… no installer is going to allow a user to do everything they want, so that’s kinda not “the arch way”… it’s not some gatekeeping BS, it’s just not what arch is about, and that’s fine… that’s why there are spinoff distros that disagree and make their own - this is FOSS after all

i think it’s still a good example, and the point stands - it kinda doesn’t really matter if he did sculpt them or not - either way, it’s the fact that he was a troll, the unknowns, the ideas that is what makes the art; not the piece itself

To suggest a machine neutral network “thinks like a human” is like suggesting a humanoid robot “runs like a human.” It’s true in an incredibly broad sense, but carries so little meaning with it.

i wasn’t meaning to suggest that it thinks like a human - simply that the processes are similar enough, and humans aren’t non-replicable… in which case there is some process behind creativity, and that process is some sort of input, processing via our neural processes, and some output. the intent was to say that AI having the possibility of creativity shouldn’t be dismissed off-hand just because it’s not human

If the AI is creative in the same way as a person, then it is a slave.

is it though? does creativity rely on being able to interpret the concept of freedom? i think creativity can be divorced from a sense of self, and thus any idea of slavery except in the sense of anthropisation from a 3rd party

but I am against selling it

why though? if the art is the inspiration and intent, then the prompt is the art and the image itself is only the expression of that inspiration and intent - all are essential parts of the piece

It’s sad to see an entire industry of workers get replaced by machines,

agree and disagree there - it’s sad that a huge amount of artists that have devoted their lives to honing their craft are now less able to make money from using their skills… on the other hand, it’s the democratisation of skills. AI art allows more people to communicate their ideas without the need for skill

It’s also a tacit admission that the machine is doing the inspiration, not the operator. The machine which is only made possible by the massive theft of intellectual property.

hard disagree on that one… the look of the image was, but the inspiration itself was derived from a prompt: the idea is the human; the expression of the idea in visual form is the computer. we have no problem saying a movie is art, and crediting much of that to the director despite the fact that they were simply giving directions

The legality of an act has no bearing on its ethics or morality.

Except their hired artist is a bastard intelligence made by theft.

you can’t on 1 hand say that legality is irrelevant and then call it when you please

or argue that a human takes inputs from their environment and produces outputs in the same way. if you say a human in an empty white room and exposed them only to copyright content and told them to paint something, they’d also entirely be basing what they paint on those works. we wouldn’t have an issue with that

what’s the difference between a human and an artificial neural net? because i disagree that there’s something special or “other” to the human brain that makes it unable to be replicated. i’m also not suggesting that these work in the same way, but we clearly haven’t defined what creativity is, and certainly haven’t written off that it could be expressed by a machine

in modern society we tend to agree that Duchamp changed the art world with his piece “Fountain” - simply a urinal signed “R. Mutt”… he didn’t sculpt it himself, he did barely anything to it. the idea is the art, not the piece itself. the idea was the debate that it sparked, the questions with no answer. if a urinal purchased from a hardware store can be art, then the idea expressed in a prompt can equally be art

and to be clear, i’m not judging any of these particular works based on their merits - i haven’t seen them, and i don’t believe any of them should be worth $250k… but also, the first piece of art created by AI: perhaps its value is not in the image itself, but the idea behind using AI and its status as “first”. the creativity wasn’t the image; the creativity and artistic intent was the process

tonic water is further from water than vitamin water is. fizzy water means exactly 1 thing: carbonated, plain water

that’s rather untrue. sugar is actually very addictive, and the quantity in soft drinks (they have additives that make them actually palatable - without they’d be so sweet you couldn’t drink much) makes them particularly problematic

They can’t stand to see someone “undeserving” do as well as or better than them, so they try to mow it down.

in australia and new zealand we have a concept called “tall poppy syndrome” (people who stand out from the crowd, who promote themselves excessively and publicly) and the reaction to that: “cutting down the tall poppy”. cutting down the tall poppy originally meant just bringing them back down to earth, but kinda morphed into simply criticising anyone that does well

we tend to have a relatively strong egalitarian streak, and perhaps that change was tearing people down rather than distributing their success to equalise

anyway, related: tearing down the tall poppy, ie pulling down anyone that stands out

i’m going to add something that isn’t really visited a lot in this context: how gay culture deals with this

i find gay men are often a lot more open with this kind of thing than the straight world. we’re quite a bit more promiscuous, kiss each other on dance floors right after meeting, etc. we have a lot more non-verbal cues that imply consent too…

mutual glances and grins across a dance floor leads to moving closer, compliment them on their clothes/hairstyle/etc, that might lead to more questions about where they got it, conversation with their friends - kinda join their group for a bit and then nobody is left out… we tend to ask for socials rather than a phone number: phone number implies date, socials is just “you’re cool” so nobody is upset: they can all give you socials and worst case you have a few new friends

that said, in gay culture you’re equally likely to just go straight from that to back home with them because we place more importance on doing what’s fun rather than needing to worry so much about if the guy is safe to be alone with - we have grindr etc after all

as a software engineer that watches too much youtube, this is the first time it’s clicked for me:

If the train moves at the speed of light, then nothing inside it will move because time will stop.

the pieces of information:

• time moves slower the faster you travel, and
• nothing can travel faster than the speed of light

have never been concretely connected in my head, but this makes a lot of sense now: time moves slower (for you) the faster you travel BECAUSE that’s the thing that stops you from moving faster than the speed of light… AND that holds true from all perspectives because it’s like… a trade-off?

start a business: you’re still being exploited, and now you’re an exploiter

emigrate: okay and now you’re in a different place and have ended back at the original choices

social support: which usually require ending back and the original choices

retrain: okay you retrain and now… you find yourself back at the original choices

there is such a thing as worse

literally doesn’t matter who they are. their strategy was to force kamala to exert pressure to stop the genocide. it failed… now palestine is even more fucked

congrats, there was a huge amount of people that told them it was risky. the risk didn’t pay off… now is the find out phase, and that is depressing as fuck