infinitepcg @ infinitepcg @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

124

Joined

2 yr. ago

I was looking for something like this! Am I using it wrong or does it only have 7 entries at the moment?

Edit: 24 hours later it's gone from 7 entries to 60+ pages. Exciting!

Anyway, it would be cool to have a feature where I can paste a list of subreddits and get a list of matching lemmy communities (where available).

I think the photo thing was fixed recently. Boost is amazing btw, except for the lack of clickable communities.

That statement is pretty stupid in general. But for server side software, open source doesn't help much. Even if you can look at the source, you still need to trust them that that's what they are running on their servers.

You give them the credentials for your Apple account. The security concept is "trust me bro" and that's really the best they can do unless Apple helps them (which they have no reason to)

In a video from MKBHD they mentioned this problem and they said that the idea is basically that Apple will not block it because it will bring them bad PR and attention from regulators who are concerned with anti trust issues. Hard to predict what will actually happen but Apple just blocking 3rd party access and citing (legitimate) privacy and security concerns seems to be a likely outcome.

Apparently it was a problem when previous Tesla models released

I assume these would be credentials in the training data, not something it got from other ChatGPT users?

I'm pretty sure it doesn't remember conversations from other users (or even your own). That's just not how it works.

Not sure if you realize it, but you're exactly proving the point of this thread. It comes of as condescending that you assume someone must be uninformed because they don't agree with you.

I didn't see that this was referring to multiplayer. In that case it makes sense.

Why? What if I want to jump into the game and then learn how to drive the cars?

Admittedly, I only checked this one article. I think it's hard to judge how evil he really was. Either way, not a hill I'm going to die on.

Yes. Not just AAA. Online commenters seem to believe that bugs don't get fixed because developers aren't aware of them. That's almost never the reason. Finding bugs is easy. Fixing them is the difficult part. And time spent fixing bugs is time not spent developing new features.

Yet often it was his own stubborn and uncompromising nature that defined his life – his choices paint a picture of a man who was unable to heed the words of others. This undendinly antagonistic nature cost him friends, honours and ultimately put him into the dark role of colonialist.

He was "stubborn and uncompromising", which makes him "antagonistic", therefore a colonialist and racist. That's a pretty low bar. I don't think it makes sense to define racism in a way that makes all 19th century naturalists racist.

If you look at a hundred paintings of faces and then make your own painting of a face, you're not expected to pay all the artists that you used to get an understanding of what a face looks like.

Even if AI companies were to pay the artists and had billions of dollars to do it, each individual artist would receive a tiny amount, because these datasets are so large.

Much more realistically, they would just retrain their models using data they can use for free.

Btw, I don't think this is a fair use question, it's really a question of whether the generated images are derivatives of the training data.

In the case of Meta, they acquired a small company with that name many years before. Makes me wonder if they also bought something called Threads before.

when someone tests the causation, ie. in an intervention study

Absoluteley, any lazy gamedev would just quit, get a boring SWE job and work fewer hours for twice the pay.

It's a familiar story to many of us: In prehistoric times, men were hunters and women were gatherers. Women were not physically capable of hunting because their anatomy was different from men.

It seems that this article is arguing against a strawman. The common understanding is not that women never hunted, it's just that it was less common than men hunting.

And because men were hunters, they drove human evolution.

What does that even mean? 🤔

The team also looked at female physiology and found that women were not only physically capable of being hunters, but that there is little evidence to support that they were not hunting.

Well, there is a long list of sex differences that sure look like adaptations to different roles. Do the authors have alternative explanations for them? Do they see them as contradictions to their findings?

I'd like to read the paper to understand what their actual findings and methodolgy was, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

A debit card should be sufficient and it seems that