stravanasu @ pglpm @lemmy.ca

Posts

38

Comments

279

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's reached 333 protesters! that's 1/3 of the way to 1000, it'd be cool if it kept on increasing :)

Thank you for the neat examples! :) I think I get it now.

Thank you! What you wrote confused me at first, I thought that using @something created a post that was only visible to user something – like a direct message. Now I've re-read the help pages, and I see that there's a second "@" at the bottom of the post field, to make the post only visible to something; otherwise (globe icon) is public.

May I ask: in this latter case, what does @something achieve then? is it a sort of "user mention", so the user is notified to have been mentioned in a public post? Will other users interested in something see it then?

[Edit: I realize that my question was phrased in a completely misleading way. Corrected now.]

Cheers!

Thanks for the recommendations!

Nothing dense in this, I don't quite know what to write either. In my opinion what you wrote in your comment is just perfect, you're a citizen simply expressing an honest concern, without lying – not all people are tech-savvy. It also makes it clear that it's a letter from a real person.

But that's only my point of view, and maybe I haven't thought enough steps ahead. Let's see what other people suggest and why.

You brought back memories and I got interested. Interesting reading about privacy:

https://www.irchelp.org/security/privacy.html

How much of it is true?

From this github comment:

If you oppose this, don't just comment and complain, contact your antitrust authority today:

• US:
  • https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
  • antitrust@ftc.gov

 

• EU:
  • https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/contact_en
  • comp-greffe-antitrust@ec.europa.eu

 

• UK:
  • https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tell-the-cma-about-a-competition-or-market-problem
  • general.enquiries@cma.gov.uk

 

• India:
  • https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/
  • https://www.cci.gov.in/filing/atd

 

• Canada:
  • https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/frm-eng/GH%C3%89T-7TDNA5

This is actually already implemented, see here.

(also @ridethisbike@lemmy.world)

Maybe it is pointless, maybe it is a bad idea. Maybe not. It's difficult to predict what this kind of small-scale actions will have on the big picture and future development. No matter what you choose or not choose to do, it's always a gamble. My way of thinking is that it's good if people say, through this kind of gestures, "I'm vigilant, I won't allow just anything to be done to me. There's a line that shouldn't be crossed".

Of course you're right about supporting and choosing alternative browsers, and similar initiatives. There are many initiatives on that front as well. I've never used Chrome, to be honest; always Firefox. But now I've even uninstalled the Chromium that came pre-installed on my (Ubuntu) machines. Besides that I ditched gmail years ago, and I've also decided to flatly refuse to use Google tools (Google docs and whatnot) with collaborators, as a matter of principle. If that means I'm cut out of projects, so be it.

Regarding WEI, I see your point, but I see dangers in "acknowledging" too much. If you read the "explainer" by the Google engineers, or in general their replies to comments and criticisms, you see that they constantly use deceiving, manipulative, and evasive language. As an example, the "explainer" says a lot "the user needs this", "the user desires that", but when you unfold the real meaning of the sentences it's clear it isn't something done for the user.

This creates a need for human users to prove to websites that they're human

Note the "need for human users", but the sentence actually means "websites need that users prove...". This is just an example. The whole explainer is written in such a deceiving manner.

The replies to criticisms are all evasive. They don't reply the actual questions or issues, they start off a tangent and spout a lot of blah blah with "benefit", "user", and other soothing words – but the actual question or issue never gets addressed. (Well, if this isn't done on purpose, then it means they are mentally impaired, with sub-normal comprehension skills).

I fuc*ing hate this kind of deceiving, politician talk – which is a red flag that they're up to no good – and I know from personal experience that as soon as you "acknowledge" something, they'll drag your into their circular, empty blabber while they do what they please.

More generally, I think we should do something against the current ad-based society and economy. So NO to WEI for me.

Travelors = travellers + sailors. I like that!

Agree (you made me think of the famous face on Mars). I mean that more as a joke. Also there's no clear threshold or divide on one side of which we can speak of "human intelligence". There's a whole range from impairing disabilities to Einstein and Euler – if it really makes sense to use a linear 1D scale, which very probably doesn't.

Here?: https://ungoogled-software.github.io/about/

Looks like a good project, I didn't know about its existence.

Thank you. So many people speaking about Fennec, and I had never heard of it!

Yes, the purpose isn't sabotaging.

Title:

ChatGPT broke the Turing test

Content:

Other researchers agree that GPT-4 and other LLMs would probably now pass the popular conception of the Turing test. [...]

researchers [...] reported that more than 1.5 million people had played their online game based on the Turing test. Players were assigned to chat for two minutes, either to another player or to an LLM-powered bot that the researchers had prompted to behave like a person. The players correctly identified bots just 60% of the time

Complete contradiction. Trash Nature, it's become only an extremely expensive gossip science magazine.

PS: The Turing test involves comparing a bot with a human (not knowing which is which). So if more and more bots pass the test, this can be the result either of an increase in the bots' Artificial Intelligence, or of an increase in humans' Natural Stupidity.

There's an ongoing protest against this on GitHub, symbolically modifying the code that would implement this in Chromium. See this lemmy post by the person who had this idea, and this GitHub commit. Feel free to "Review changes" --> "Approve". Around 300 people have joined so far.

Yeah that's bullsh*t by the author of the article.

This is so cool! Not just the font but the whole process and study. Please feel free to cross-post to Typography & fonts.

Thank you for the great help, I hope it'll be useful to others too :)

Thank you for the info! As I'm completely new to Matrix I was indeed wondering. Probably the spam problem will increase as it becomes more popular....