Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)𝒍
𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏 @ lemann @lemmy.one
Posts
13
Comments
1,344
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • This kind of thing could work for a few apps, say a color picker utility or a QR code generator etc.

    Looking at the docs, it isn't clear if apps can write to their own namespace (instead of writing to user folders directly), but if they can, we could expand the scope to games like supertuxkart, 2048 etc, which would then be able to save user milestones and progress in their own area - a bit like how Android apps do it

    https://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/sandbox-permissions.html

    It's a great start IMO, although admittedly there is still work to do. Flatpak atm bridges the gap with allowing new apps, requiring new libs, to run on older stable/LTS distros

  • I think any can be really.

    A friend gives us validation, which could push us to do things we don't want in some situations.

    We can also be betrayed by a friend, and our outlook on life/perspectives shift into darker territory, particularly if you are isolated and stuff...

    Someone you consider to be a friend may also not have your best interests at heart, or may have a completely wrong impression of you, and may not protect you from danger when you need it most.

    Despite those, IMO friends are kind of essential from a mental health perspective - we're social beings, isolation can bring out the worst in us. Whenever you come across someone that shares your values, keep them close 👍

  • Removing it can cause a bootloop in some cases, likely something in the boot process is looking for it and reinstalling that app if missing. Google's play services recently started doing that with permissions that are revoked with root

    Should be removable on a non-stock ROM though

  • Chonky TL;DR because I was a little annoyed that there wasn't one here -

    Certainly no commercial product could ever work at a profit if you needed remote operators anything like that often. As Brooks points out, the term “autonomous” barely applies.

    Beyond what Brooks pointed out, the story also notes “Those vehicles were supported by a vast operations staff, with 1.5 workers per vehicle”.

    Fitting with this general vibe, a source (that in fairness, I don’t know well) just told me that his impression having visited with them not so long ago was that “they're definitely relying on remote interventions to create an illusion of stronger AI than they really have”.

    if Cruise’s vehicles really need an intervention every few miles, and 1.5 external operators for every vehicle, they don’t seem to even be remotely close to what they have been alleging to the public. Shareholders will certainly sue, and if it’s bad as it looks, I doubt that GM will continue the project, which was recently suspended.

    As safety expert Missy Cummings said to me this morning, remote operators could well be “the dark secret of ALL self-driving.”

    Human lives at are stake.

    Cruise CEO Kyle Vogt essentially confirmed that their “driverless” cars need very regular human intervention:

  • The web UI would be the safest bet I think.

    Apps may have their own mechanisms for loading links to news articles, videos and stuff to make it show in a user-friendly way, with the downside that the linked website can respond with a tracking image as the Opengraph banner etc.