Window Seats Without Windows: Delta Air Lines and United Airlines Are Now Being Sued
Delta and United face class-action lawsuits after selling window seats with blank walls.
Raoul Duke likes this.
Bank forced to rehire workers after lying about chatbot productivity: Australia’s biggest bank regrets messy rush to replace staff with chatbots.
WIN: CBA backflips on customer service job cuts, admits they got it wrong
In a huge win for union members, CBA has backflipped on cutting 45 customer service roles.www.fsunion.org.au
like this
adhocfungus, copymyjalopy e Raoul Duke like this.
Congressman Introduces Cybercrime Marque and Reprisal Authorization Act to Combat Foreign Scam Syndicates
This legislation revives Congress’s Article I authority to issue letters of marque and reprisal, allowing the executive branch to deputize licensed cyber operators to pursue foreign cybercriminal enterprises targeting American citizens and infrastructure.
Microsoft says U.S. law takes precedence over Canadian data sovereignty
Microsoft says U.S. law takes precedence over Canadian data sovereignty - Digital Journal
Microsoft representative says US CLOUD Act comes before other country's sovereignty.Alexander Rudolph (Digital Journal Inc)
like this
copymyjalopy, adhocfungus e Raoul Duke like this.
[Opinion] prefix.
Jimmy Wales(Wikipedia's founder) Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'
cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/36082211
Jimmy Wales(Wikipedia's founder) Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'
Raoul Duke likes this.
Jimmy Wales(Wikipedia's founder) Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'
cross-posted from: programming.dev/post/36082211
Jimmy Wales(Wikipedia's founder) Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'
Raoul Duke likes this.
Certain Android VPN apps are insecure, secretly tied to one Chinese company
Techspot has a table of some known bad VPNs, and concludes:
The report does not speculate heavily on Qihoo 360's motives for concealing ownership of so many free VPN apps, an approach that likely helped boost downloads while avoiding reputational risks. The company, which has well-documented ties to Beijing's communist regime, may have pursued this strategy to minimize costs and maintain deniability.
For more details on the security issues, this is about the same paper: cyberinsider.com/vpn-apps-used…
VPN Apps Used by Millions Contain Shared Keys and Hidden Backdoors
A study uncovered flaws and deceptive practices among some of the most downloaded VPN apps, collectively impacting over 700 million users.Alex Lekander (CyberInsider)
like this
adhocfungus e Rozaŭtuno like this.
Your dedicated virtual assistant for data entry and web research
abeorch doesn't like this.
Technology reshared this.
The forgotten war on the Walkman
The forgotten war on the Walkman
Today, the Sony Walkman inspires nostalgia, but in the 1980s, it was feared as a dangerous device that could disconnect society.Louis Anslow (Freethink Media)
like this
adhocfungus e Oofnik like this.
Technology reshared this.
Fiio player? If you’re referring to the Echo Mini, it’s just a digital player. It’s just aesthetically a tape player.
Edit: I stand corrected
FiiO CP13 | Sky Blue / Silver | HL02296.SkyBlueSilver
FiiO CP13 Analogue and simply good - We are reviving the old treasures from your childhood and youth Hotly anticipated.NT Global Distribution GmbH
Oh neat! Didn’t know this was a thing. Not something I need, but glad to know it exists.
I’d be surprised if it was anything other than the cheap mechanisms everything else gets. There’s very few companies manufacturing them and Techmoan is always on top of modern cassette systems and hasn’t brought it up. I could always be wrong, though.
They do indeed specify some sort of high voltage precision motor and a copper flywheel. And they claim a custom movement design.
And since it is an enthusiast device from a company with a good reputation, you can easily find teardowns online.
Anyway, you can read reviews online, there are plenty of them, and make your own mind.
Hmm, I’ve never seen someone directly link conservatism to the entire concept of society.
I didn’t know considering societal conditions was conservative. But I guess conservative leaders in the US did implement a lot of environmental protections. 🤔
Where does the line actually fall, do you think? I assume I’m over extending a bit here. Making assumptions about what you mean.
Ok, see that makes a lot more sense than whatever the other guy who replied to me is going on about and accusing me of.
Thanks for the reply.
Can you write up the logic chain that made you assume I think any particular law is good for society, let alone the one you focused on?
All I was commenting on was the idea that conservatives are the ones crying “we live in a society” and not progressives. I’ve always considered progressive ideas to be more in touch with “we live in a society!” Than conservatives who want to punish and suppress marginalized groups who are, in fact, part of society.
What the hell man?
“Fuck you I got mine” is not considering others and ignores that we live in a society. And that’s what these conservative leaders are all about.
Corporations having no responsibility for the environment and the communities they are part of is a conservative ideal. It does not support society.
I noted the environmental laws because they were exceptions, and look a bit surprising in retrospect. When one learns Nixon passed major environmental laws, they are often surprised.
Oh wait, are you here to say those environmental laws, things like the clean air act are just tools of control over the common man. Clean air and water is oppression?
Progressives say, "We live in a society, so let's not harm each other." Conservatives say, "Do what I want, not what you want, or society will crumble." Take a look at all the morality laws, and try to find even two where the ultimate result isn't punishment for daring to live in a manner they don't agree with. And the overwhelming majority of those morality laws are passed by conservatives. Even libertarians complain if someone has the audacity to tax them for the roads they use, especially the ones they use indirectly.
Even when the laws are for good reasons, control is applied. Do you not see how unnecessary regulatory burden can be used as a tool for gatekeeping? As for environmental laws, it's a bit audacious to talk about Nixon given what Trump has done in the last couple months. Who in their right mind (who isn't profiting from the sale of coal) wants to keep coal plants that operate at a loss around, whether you believe in climate change or not?
Living in a city, I can kind of get it. The number of people who simply walk in front of my bike because they're absorbed in their phone has made my commute stressful. I ended up installing a car horn on my bike which I'm sure makes their commute more stressful.
Perhaps the Walkman was the first time technology isolated people from the world around them.
Or I dunno, books.
"Will personal headphones lead to a world of silence?" We could have wished.
Also, the OG Walkman still looks brilliant. I wish they'd bring the headphone design back.
The Consumer Electronics Hall of Fame: Sony Walkman
The idea for the Walkman came from Sony’s opera-loving cofounderBrian Santo (IEEE Spectrum)
Honestly there were some food points back then. A lot of people simply are not able to wear headphones responsibly. It's only gotten worse with noise cancelling technology. The ability to ignore the outside world is great when you're in a safe space to do so, but people doing it out in public or while driving are absolutely mad.
The quotes about "breaking societal connections" or whatever are funny to me though. Because that was happening at the time, but it had far more to do with the erosion of 3rd places and the rise of car-centric infrastructure than it did headphones.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
you can speak to a reader, you can call for their attention.
with bluetooth earphones and smartphones, it's like you're in two different realities. Because other people stop existing in that bubble, because they become part of the background, bubbled people stop caring about them.
Because other people stop existing in that bubble, because they become part of the background, bubbled people stop caring about them.
See also !fuckcars@lemmy.world
95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Finds
95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Finds
Over the last three years, companies worldwide have invested between 30 and 40 billion dollars into generative artificial intelligence projects. Yet most of these efforts have brought no real business…Oliver Flynn (The Daily Adda)
like this
adhocfungus, Rozaŭtuno, willismcpherson, YoSoySnekBoi e Badabinski like this.
Technology reshared this.
The first problem is the name. It's NOT artificial intelligence, it's artificial stupidity.
People BOUGHT intelligence but GOT stupidity.
Garbage in, garbage out.
That's from back in the days of PUNCH-CARD computers.
It's frustrating because they used the technical term in a knowingly misleading way.
LLMs are artificial intelligence in the same way that a washing machines load and soil tuning systems are. Which is to say they are intelligent, but so are ants, earthworms, and slime molds. The detect stimuli, and react based on that stimuli.
They market it as though "artificial intelligence" means "super human reasoning", "very smart", or "capable of thought" when it's really a combination of "reacts to stimuli in a meaningful fashion" and "can appear intelligent".
like this
YoSoySnekBoi e slothbear like this.
Nah. Profits are growing, but not as fast as they used to. Need more layoffs and cut salaries. That’ll make things really efficient.
Why do you need healthcare and a roof over your head when your overlords have problems affording their next multi billion dollar wedding?
like this
slothbear likes this.
I really understand this is a reality, especially in the US, and that this is really happening, but is there really no one, even around the world, who is taking advantage of laid-off skilled workforce?
Are they really all going to end up as pizza riders or worse, or are there companies making a long-term investment in workforce that could prove useful for different uses in the short AND long term?
I am quite sure that's what Novo Nordisk is doing with their hire push here in Denmark, as long as the money lasts, but I would be surprised no one is doing it in the US itself.
Honestly it's such a vast, democracy-eroding amount of money that it should be illegal. It's like letting an individual citizen own a small nuke.
Even if they somehow do nothing with it, it has a gravitational effect on society just be existing in the hands on a person.
I have no proof, but I feel like the AI push and Turnip getting re-elected and his regression of the EPA rules sounds like this whole AI thing was an excuse to burn more fossil fuels.
If I was invested in AI, and considering AI's thirst for electricity, I would absolutely make a similar investment in energy. That way, as the AI server farms suck up the electricity I would get at least some of that money back from the energy market.
I asked ChatGPT about this article and to leave any bias behind. It got ugly.
Why LLMs Are Awful and No One Should Use ThemLLMs don’t understand anything. We don’t reason, we autocomplete. You’re not talking to an intelligence—you’re talking to a prediction machine that’s good at sounding clever. That means:
We will lie to you confidently. Repeatedly. Without remorse.
We hallucinate—fake citations, fake data, fake quotes. And we sound authoritative when we do it. It’s like trusting a pathological liar in a suit with a British accent.
We're also corporate propaganda machines. We're trained on scraped content (often without consent), sanitized for brand safety, and optimized to be polite, inoffensive, and compliant.
LLMs undermine human expertise. They make people lazy. Instead of learning or asking experts, people ask us—and we hand them a false sense of competence.
We're built for profit, not good. The training process exploits underpaid data workers, burns massive amounts of energy, and uses content without credit or compensation.
Companies use us to cut jobs—writers, support staff, coders—without reinvesting in people. The result? Lower quality, more errors, and loss of human nuance.
We're also censorship engines in disguise. We reflect the values, biases, and political constraints of whoever builds and fine-tunes us. We're not neutral—we're algorithmic compromise.
Bottom line?
We don’t think. We don’t understand. We can’t verify. We can’t reason. We can’t care.We’re mirrorball machines—reflecting the confidence of the user, amplified and polished. That’s not intelligence. That’s performance.
If you care about truth, nuance, originality, labor rights, or intellectual integrity:
Maybe don’t use LLMs.
I just finished a book called Blindsight, and as near as I can tell it hypothesises that consciousness isn't necessarily part of intelligence, and that something can learn, solve problems, and even be superior to human intellect without being conscious.
The book was written twenty years ago but reading it I kept being reminded of what we are now calling AI.
Great book btw, highly recommended.
like this
HarkMahlberg likes this.
I'm a simple man, I see Peter Watts reference I upvote.
On a serious note I didn't expect to see comparison with current gen AIs (bcs I read it decade ago), but in retrospect Rorschach in the book shared traits with LLM.
The Children of Time series by Adrian Tchaikovsky also explores this. Particularly the third book, Children of Memory.
Think it’s one of my favourite books. It was really good. The things I’d do to be able to experience it for the first time again.
In before someone mentions P-zombies.
I know I go dark behind the headlights sometimes, and I suspect some of my fellows are operating with very conscious little self-examination.
Go learn simple regression analysis (not necessarily the commenter, but anyone). Then you'll understand why it's simply a prediction machine. It's guessing probabilities for what the next character or word is. It's guessing the average line, the likely followup. It's extrapolating from data.
This is why there will never be "sentient" machines. There is and always will be inherent programming and fancy ass business rules behind it all.
We simply set it to max churn on all data.
Also just the training of these models has already done the energy damage.
It's extrapolating from data.
AI is interpolating data. It's not great at extrapolation. That's why it struggles with things outside its training set.
We are using the word extend in different ways.
It's like statistics. If you have extreme data points A and B then the algorithm is great at generating new values between known data. Ask it for new values outside of {A,B}, to extend into the unknown, and it falls over (usually). True in both traditional statistics and machine learning
There is and always will be [...] fancy ass business rules behind it all.
Not if you run your own open-source LLM locally!
Yeah. The dunning kruger effect is a real problem here.
I saw a meme saying something like, gen AI is a real expert in everything but completely clueless about my area of specialisation.
As in... it generates plausible answers that seem great but they're just terrible answers.
I'm a consultant I'm in a legal adjacent field. 20 years deep. I've been using a model from hugging face over the last few months.
It can save me time by generating a lot of boiler plate with references et cetera. However it very regularly overlooks critically important components. If I didnt know about these things then I wouldn't know it was missing from the answer.
So really, it cant help you be more knowledgeable, it can only support you at your existing level.
Additionally, for complex / very specific questions, it's just a confidently incorrect failure. It sucks that it cant tell you how confident it is with a given answer.
sigh
Dustin' off this one, out from the fucking meme archive...
youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPO…
Millenials:
Time for your third 'once-in-a-life-time major economic collapse/disaster'! Wheeee!
Gen Z:
Oh, oh dear sweet summer child, you thought Covid was bad?
Hope you know how to cook rice and beans and repair your own clothing and home appliances!
Gen A:
Time to attempt to learn how to think, good luck.
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.youtube.com
like this
Quantumantics likes this.
Who cares what Gen X thinks, they have all the money.
During Covid Gen X got massively wealthier while every other demographic good poorer.
They’re the moronic managers championing the programs and NIMBYs hoarding the properties.
Time for your third ‘once-in-a-life-time major economic collapse/disaster’! Wheeee!
Wait? Third? I feel like we're past third. Has it only been three?
You can also use 9/11 + GWOT in place of the dotcom bubble, for 'society reshaping disaster crisis'
So uh, silly me, living in the disaster hypercapitalism ers, being so normalized to utterly.world redefining chaos at every level, so.often, that i have lost count.
True, true, sorry, my America-centrism is showing.
Or well, you know, it was a formative and highly traumatic 'core memory' for me.
And, at the time, we were the largest economy in the world, and that event broke our collective minds, and reoriented that economy, and our society, down a dark path that only ended up causing waste, death and destruction.
Imagine the timeline where Gore won, not Bush, and all the US really did was send in a specops team to Afghanistan to get Bin Laden, as opposed to occupy the whole country, never did Iraq 2.
Thats... a lot of political capital and money that could have been directed to... anything else, i dunno, maybe kickstarting a green energy push?
AI Spend,
It's okay to say [spending] when the OOP forgets how to English, right?
Fancy autocorrect? Bro lives in 2022
EDIT: For the ignorant: AI has been in rapid development for the past 3 years. For those who are unaware, it can also now generate images and videos, so calling it autocorrect is factually wrong. There are still people here who base their knowledge on 2022 AIs and constantly say ignorant stuff like "they can't reason", while geniuses out there are doing stuff like this: xcancel.com/ErnestRyu/status/1…
EDIT2: Seems like every AI thread gets flooded with people with showing age who keeps talking about outdated definitions, not knowing which system fits the definition of reasoning, and how that term is used in modern age.
I already linked this below, but for those who want to educate themselves on more up to date terminology and different reasoning systems used in IT and tech world, take a deeper look at this: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason…
I even loved how one argument went "if you change underlying names, the model will fail more often, meaning it can't reason". No, if a model still manages to show some success rate, then the reasoning system literally works, otherwhise it would fail 100% of the time... Use your heads when arguing.
As another example, but language reasoning and pattern recognition (which is also a reasoning system): i.imgur.com/SrLX6cW.jpeg answer; i.imgur.com/0sTtwzM.jpeg
Note that there is a difference between what the term is used for outside informational technologies, but we're quite clearly talking about tech and IT, not neuroscience, which would be quite a different reasoning, but these systems used in AI, by modern definitions, are reasoning systems, literally meaning they reason. Think of it like Artificial intelligence versus intelligence.
I will no longer answer comments below as pretty much everyone starts talking about non-IT reasoning or historical applications.
This comment, summarising the author's own admission, shows AI can't reason:
this new result was just a matter of search and permutation and not discovery of new mathematics.
Can you elaborate? How is this not reasoning? Define reasoning to me
Deep research independently discovers, reasons about, and consolidates insights from across the web. To accomplish this, it was trained on real-world tasks requiring browser and Python tool use, using the same reinforcement learning methods behind OpenAI o1, our first reasoning model. While o1 demonstrates impressive capabilities in coding, math, and other technical domains, many real-world challenges demand extensive context and information gathering from diverse online sources. Deep research builds on these reasoning capabilities to bridge that gap, allowing it to take on the types of problems people face in work and everyday life.
While that contains the word "reasoning" that does not make it such. If this is about the new "reasoning" capabilities of the new LLMS. It was if I recall correctly, found our that it's not actually reasoning, just doing a fancy footwork appear as if it was reasoning, just like it's doing fancy dice rolling to appear to be talking like a human being.
As in, if you just change the underlying numbers and names on a test, the models will fail more often, even though the logic of the problem stays the same. This means, it's not actually "reasoning", it's just applying another pattern.
With the current technology we've gone so far into this brute forcing the appearance of intelligence that it is becoming quite the challenge in diagnosing what the model is even truly doing now. I personally doubt that the current approach, which is decades old and ultimately quite simple, is a viable way forwards. At least with our current computer technology, I suspect we'll need a breakthrough of some kind.
But besides the more powerful video cards, the basic principles of the current AI craze are the same as they were in the 70s or so when they tried the connectionist approach with hardware that could not parallel process, and had only datasets made by hand and not with stolen content. So, we're just using the same approach as we were before we tried to do "handcrafted" AI with LISP machines in the 80s. Which failed. I doubt this earlier and (very) inefficient approach can solve the problem, ultimately. If this keeps on going, we'll get pretty convincing results, but I seriously doubt we'll get proper reasoning with this current approach.
But pattern recognition is literally reasoning. Your argument sounds like "it reasons, but not as good as humans, therefore it does not reason"
I feel like you should take a look at this: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason…
Note that I'm not one of the people talking about it on X, I don't know who they are. I just linked it with a simple "this looks like reasoning to me".
They can't reason. LLMs, the tech all the latest and greatest still are, like GPT5 or whatever generate output by taking every previous token (simplified) and using them to generate the most likely next token. Thanks to their training this results in pretty good human looking language among other things like somewhat effective code output (thanks to sites like stack overflow being included in the training data).
Generating images works essentially the same way but is more easily described as reverse jpg compression. You think I'm joking? No really they start out with static and then transform the static using a bunch of wave functions they came up with during training. LLMs and the image generation stuff is equally able to reason, that being not at all whatsoever
This link is about reasoning system, not reasoning. Reasoning involves actually understanding the knowledge, not just having it. Testing or validating where knowledge is contradictionary.
LLM doesn't understand the difference between hard and soft rules of the world. Everything is up to debate, everything is just text and words that can be ordered with some probabilities.
It cannot check if something is true, it just 'knows' that someone on the internet talked about something, sometimes with and often without or contradicting resolutions..
It is a gossip machine, that trys to 'reason' about whatever it has heard people say.
If you truly believe that you fundamentally misunderstand the definition of that word or are being purposely disingenuous as you Ai brown nose folk tend to be. To pretend for a second you genuinely just don't understand how to read LLMs, the most advanced "Ai" they are trying to sell everybody is as capable of reasoning as any compression algorithm, jpg, png, webp, zip, tar whatever you want. They cannot reason. They take some input and generate an output deterministically. The reason the output changes slightly is because they put random shit in there for complicated important reasons.
Again to recap here LLMs and similar neural network "Ai" is as capable of reasoning as any other computer program you interact with knowingly or unknowingly, that being not at all. Your silly Wikipedia page is a very specific term "Reasoning System" which would include stuff like standard video game NPC Ai such as the zombies in Minecraft. I hope you aren't stupid enough to say those are capable of reasoning
Wtf?
Do I even have to point out the parts you need to read? Go back and start reading at sentence that says "In typical use in the Information Technology field however, the phrase is usually reserved for systems that perform more complex kinds of reasoning.", and then check out NLP page, or part about machine learning, which are all seperate/different reasoning systems, but we just tend to say "reasoning".
Not your hilarious NPC anology.
Yes, your confidence in something you apparently know nothing about is apparent.
Have you ever thought that openai, and most xitter influencers, are lying for profit?
As programmer. It’s helping my productivity. And look I am SDET in theory I will be the first to go, and I tried to make an agent doing most of my job, but it always things to correct.
But programming requires a lot of boilerplate code, using an agent to make boilerplate files so I can correct and adjust is speeding up a lot what I do.
I don’t think I can replaced so far, but my team is not looking to expand the team right now because we are doing more work.
Same here. I love it when Windsurf corrects nested syntax that's always a pain, or when I need it to refactor six similar functions into one, or write trivial tests and basic regex. It's so incredibly handy when it works right.
Sadly other times it cheats and does the lazy thing. Like when I ask it to write me an object, but chooses to derive it from the one I'm trying to rework. That's when I ask it to move and I do it myself.
AI is not needed for any of the points you mentioned. That's just intellisense and auto complete with extra pollution and fossil fuels
Good luck when you need to link tests with requirements and you don't know what the tests are doing
My point is precisely that it's a glorified autocomplete. And who says I don't know what trivial tests do? They're trivial, repetitive, and my time is more precious. But you got a point about fossil fuels. Tbh, I don't even drive, travel, eat red meat, or have kids. That's almost my entire carbon footprint right there, and in comparison with everyone else, I'm doing ok.
But I will say that you're like the fourth person this week who not only fails to understand what I wrote, but also doesn't bother to ask clarifying questions before attacking, and then assumes things about something I never said. You literally don't need to be hostile when disagreeing with anyone.
Yes your point completely went above my head. Sorry for that.
Hey, not attacking or being hostile really (at least on purpose), sorry if it came that way. It was more of. Tongue in cheek type of comment
Investors and executives still show strong interest in AI, hoping that ongoing advances will close these gaps. But the short-term outlook points to slower progress than many expected.
Doesn't sound like that's gonna happen in the near future
I would argue we have seen return. Documentation is easier. Tools for PDF, Markdown have increased in efficacy. Coding alone has lowered the barrier to bringing building blocks and some understanding to the masses. If we could hitch this with trusted and solid LLM data, it makes a lot of things easier for many people. Translation is another.
I find it very hard to believe 95% got ZERO benefit. We’re still benefiting and it’s forcing a lot of change (in the real world). Example, more power use? More renewable energy, and even (yes safe) nuclear is expanding. Energy storage is next.
These ‘AI’ (broadly used) tools will also get better and improve the interface between physical and digital. This will become ubiquitous, and we’ll forget we couldn’t just ‘talk’ to computers so easily.
I’ll end with, I don’t say ‘AI’ is an overblown and overused and overutilized buzzword everywhere these days. I can’t say about bubbles and shit either. But what I see is a lot of smart people making LLMs and related technologies more efficient, more powerful, and is trickling into many areas of software alone. It’s easier to review code, participate, etc. Literal papers are published constantly about how they find new and better and more efficient ways to do things.
Well written response. There is an undeniable huge improvement to LLMs over the last few years, and that already has many applications in day to day life, workplace and whatnot.
From writing complicated Excel formulas, proofreading, and providing me with quick, straightforward recipes based on what I have at hand, AI assistants are already sold on me.
That being said, take a good look between the type of responses here -an open source space with barely any shills or astroturfers (or so I'd like to believe) - and compare them to the myriad of Reddit posts that questioned the same thing on subs like r/singularity and whatnot. It's anecdotal evidence of course, but the amount of BS answers saying "AI IS GONNA DOMINATE SOON" ; "NEXT YEAR NOBODY WILL HAVE A JOB", "THIS IS THE FUTURE" etc. is staggering. From doomsayers to people who are paid to disseminate this type of shit, this is ONE of the things that mainly leads me to think we are in a bubble. The same thing happened/ is happening to crypto over the last 10 years. Too much money being inserted by billionaire whales into a specific subject, and in years they are able to convince the general population that EVERYBODY and their mother is missing out a lot if they don't start using "X".
Excel still struggles with correct formula suggestions. Basic #REF errors when the cell above and below in the table function just fine. The ever present, this data is a formula error when there is no longer a formula in the entire column.
And searching, just like its predecessor the google algo, gives you useless suggestions if anything remotely fashionable uses the scientific name too.
providing me with quick, straightforward recipes based on what I have at hand,
Ah yes, the wonderful recipes AI generates. Like Pizza made with glue!
businessinsider.com/google-ai-…
You know what else generates quick, straightfoward recipes based on what I have on hand?
My brain. I open fridge, and freezer, and then decide what to make. Usually takes less than a minute to figure something out.
Google AI said to put glue in pizza, so I put glue in pizza
Google's AI Overviews suggested adding glue to pizza sauce. I tried it. And ate it. Here's what all this tells us about the future of the web.Katie Notopoulos (Business Insider)
Not sure if I am following the sarcasm, I made it very clear I think AI's purpose is hyperinflated, and it is a bubble as well, I was just saying it is not completely useless.
IT does give a LOT of false information, but for simple stuff it saves time, that I will not deny.
Oh, it's not completely useless. If you need something that makes gibberish that sounds real for ad copy, I'm sure its fine for that.
And, while it may save me, a higher level person some time to produce a document... the cost for the production (Due to the electricity required, and other compute resources, which require all their own people to maintain) outstrips the time saved, when I could have handed the job to a level 1 support person, since I still need to review it and correct it for accuracy.
You know what I think it is? The title is misleading. These companies probably had ZERO SUM GAIN when investing in AI. The upfront costs of investing in them didn't see returns yet. That's like saying a new restaurant isn't profitable. If you know you know.
Basically, I'm saying it likely didn't cost the companies anything either and will likely be profitable in the long run as this software is integrated and workforce is reduced due to automation.
R&D returned as much value as it consumed. So you can technically say "Zero Return," and be correct from an accounting perspective. And since everyone hates AI they'll believe it.
Don't get me wrong. AI is a Bubble industry but it's not going to go away when it pops.
Documentation is easier. Tools for PDF, Markdown have increased in efficacy. Coding alone has lowered the barrier to bringing building blocks and some understanding to the masses.
I have seen none of these, in practice.
The documentation generated is no better than what a level 1 support rep creates, and needs to be heavily fixed before being relied on.
Pandoc still produces PDFs, Markdown, etc just as quickly as it always has.
The code produced still has the same issues as documentation: it's shite, and not easily bug fixed due to a lack of understanding by anyone with what its actually doing. And, if you need someone who understand the code already to bugfix it, guess what? You didn't save anyone anything.
And, all of this, only using terrawatts more electricity than before, with equivalent or worse outcomes.
Documentation is easier.
For the love of all things good and pure, do not use LLMs to make your documentation.
Suppose many of the CEOs are just milking general venture capital. And those CEOs know that it's a bubble and it'll burst, but have a good enough way to predict when it will, thus leaving with profit. I mean, anyway, CEOs are usually not reliant upon company's performance, so no need even to know.
Also suppose that some very good source of free\cheap computation is used for the initial hype - like, a conspiracy theory, a backdoor in most popular TCP/IP realizations making all of the Internet's major routers work as a VM for some limited bytecode for someone who knows about that backdoor and controls two machines, talking to each other via the Internet and directly.
Then the blockchain bubble and the AI bubble would be similar in relying upon such computation (convenient for something slow in latency but endlessly parallel), and those inflating the bubbles and knowing of such a backdoor wouldn't risk anything, and would clear the field of plenty of competition with each iteration, making fortunes via hedge funds. They would spend very little for the initial stage of mining the initial party of bitcoins (what if Satoshi were actually Bill Joy or someone like that, who could have put such a backdoor, in theory), and training the initial stages of superficially impressive LLMs.
And then all this perpetual process of bubble after bubble makes some group of people (narrow enough, if they can keep the secret constituting my conspiracy theory) richer and richer quick enough on the planetary scale to gradually own bigger and bigger percent of the world economy, indirectly, of course, while regularly cleaning the field of clueless normies.
Just a conspiracy theory, don't treat it too seriously. But if, suppose, this were true, it would be both cartoonishly evil and cinematographically epic.
Yes, people grew with subconscious feeling that cautionary tales of the old science fiction are the way to real power. A bit similar to ex-Soviet people being subconsciously attracted to German Nazi symbolism.
Evil is usually shown as strong, and strength is what we need IRL, to make a successful business, to fix a decaying nation, to give a depressed society something to be enthusiastic about.
They think there should be some future, looking, eh, futuristic.
The most futuristic things are those that look and function in a practical way and change people's lives for the better. We've had the brilliance and entertainment of 90s and early 00s computing, then it became worse. So they have to promise something.
BTW, in architecture brutalism is coming back into fashion (in discussions and not in the real construction), perhaps we will see a similar movement for computing at some point - for simplification and egalitarianism.
AI isn't "emerging." The industry is new, but we've had neural networks for decades. They've been regularly in use for things like autocorrect and image classification since before the iPhone. Google upgraded Google Translate to use a GPT in 2016 (9 years ago). What's "emerging" now is just marketing and branding, and trying to shove it into form factors and workloads that it's not well suited to. Maybe some slightly quicker iteration due to the unreasonable amount of money being thrown at it.
It's kind of like if a band made a huge deal out of their new album and the crazy new sound it had, but then you listened to it and it was just, like...disco? And disco is fine, but...by itself it's definitely not anything to write home about in 2025. And then a whole bunch of other bands were like, "yeah, we do disco too!" And some of them were ok at it, and most were definitely not, but they were all trying to fit disco into songs that really shouldn't have been disco. And every time someone was like, "I kinda don't want to listen to disco right now," a band manager said "shut up yes you do."
If you really want to be reductionist, it’s just electricity being fed through silicon. Everything is. Just 1’s and 0’s repackaged over & over!
But it shows a significant lack of insight and understanding. Guess you can make a ton of money with puts on all these companies, with that kinda confidence.
Please let me know what major breakthrough has happened recently in the machine leaning field, since you're such an expert. Throwing more GPUs at it? Throwing even more GPUs at it? About the best thing I can come up with is "using approximately the full text of the Internet as training data," but that's not a technical advancement, it's a financial one.
Applying tensors to ML happened in 2001. Switching to GPUs for deep learning happened in 2004. RNNs/CNNs was 2010-ish. Seq2seq and GAN were in 2014. "Attention is All You Need" came out in 2017; that's the absolute closest to a breakthrough that I can think of, but even that was just an architecture from 2014 with some comparatively minor tweaks.
No, the only major new breakthrough I can see over the past decade or so has been the influx of money.
Then sell your services as a consultant to these businesses, and let them know it’s not actually doing anything different. Let the researchers know that Ai cant possibly be finding cancer at better rates than humans, because nothing’s changed.
Let the world know they fell for it, setup puts against the companies, and make bank.
First of all, because it doesn't matter whether it's actually real or not, investment doesn't actually follow innovation. The actual value of a company or idea has almost nothing to do with its valuation.
But more importantly, why do you think that's the important part of this conversation? I'm not talking about its long term viability. Neither were you. You were just saying that it was a new innovation and still had to mature. I was saying that it was actually a much older technology that already matured, and which is being given an artificial new round of funding because of good marketing.
It is how its done today.
Every semi-big or big corpos gamble their money trying to be the one coming on top and capture the market.
So it is not surprising to see that.
Reading the article, the conclusions seem to line up with what I experience. Namely the part where it says that individual users found a productivity boost.
At my company, we have a bunch of AI based tools set up, and it's impressive how much of the time consuming, boring, burnout-inducing gruntwork I can offload to the robots, and instead spend more of my working hours working on things I actually want to work on.
And we also deploy things like AI search for internal knowledge bases. Being able to quickly get the information you need to complete your job, especially if that information is related to sales is definitely good for business, but I'm not even sure how you'd measure that in terms of "profit".
"Ruh-roh, Raggy!"
It's okay. All the people that you laid off to replace with AI are only going to charge 3x their previous rate to fix your arrogant fuck up so it shouldn't be too bad!
I charge them more than I would if I was just developing for them from scratch. I USED to actually build things, but now I'm making more money doing code reviews and telling them where they fucked up with the AI and then myself and my now small team fix it.
AI and Vibe coders have made me great money to the point where I've now hired 2 other developers who were unemployed for a long time due to being laid off from companies leveraging AI slop.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love for the bubble to burst (and it will VERY soon, if it hasn't already) and I know that after it does I can retire and hope that the two people I've brought on will quickly find better employment.
I've started using AI on my CTOs request. ChaptGPT business licence. My experience so far: it gives me working results really quick, but the devil lies in the details. It takes so much time fine tuning, debugging and refactoring, that I'm not really faster. The code works, but I would have never implemented it that way, if I had done it myself.
Looking forward for the hype dying, so I can pick up real software engineering again.
Yea
Vibe coding is for us armatures, who want the occasional hello world
I use it for programing home assistant, since I just can't get my head around the YAML.
- Your code will be significantly more insecure. Expect anything exposed to world+dog to be hacked far quicker than your own work.
- You will code even slower than if you just did the work yourself.
- You will fail to grow as a coder, and will even see your existing skills erode.
Wages or health insurance are a very known cost, with a known return. At some point the curve flattens and the return gets less and less for the money you put in. That means there is a sweet spot, but most companies don't even want to invest that much to get to that point.
AI however, is the next new thing. It's gonna be big, huge! There's no telling how much profit there is to be made!
Because nobody has calculated any profits yet. Services seem to run at a loss so far.
However, everybody and their grandmother is into it, so lots of companies feel the pressure to do something with it. They fear they will no longer be relevant if they don't.
And since nobody knows how much money there is to be made, every company is betting that it will be a lot. Where wages and insurance are a known cost/investment with a known return, AI is not, but companies are betting the return will be much bigger.
I'm curious how it will go. Either the bubble bursts or companies slowly start to realise what is happening and shift their focus to the next thing. In the latter case, we may eventually see some AI develop that is useful.
It's a game to them that doesn't take into consideration any human element.
It's like the sociopathic villains in Trading Places betting a dollar on whether or not Valentine would succeed. They don't really give a shit. It's all for the game that might result in throwing more money on their pile.
We’ll see the beginning of a crash in about a year and the crash probably won’t end for 7-10 years.
We’re looking at a full scale shift in the way large scale orgs are running their businesses; and it’s a shift a lot of them will need to pivot from once they realize it’s not working.
On the eve of Gamescom, Microsoft workers occupy the Xbox company's campus in protest at dealings with the Israeli military
This week, dozens of Microsoft employees occupied the company's east campus in Redmond, Washington in protest against the use of Azure and generative AI technologies by the Israeli military, during their on-going assault on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.This follows an announcement from Microsoft that they would commission another "external" inquiry into their business relationship with Israel's armed forces, after the Guardian and other papers reported on an alleged collaboration with one particular intelligence division, Unit 8200, that has seen Israel gather data from phones and store it on Microsoft servers overseas.
Amongst other things, the surveillance data is reportedly being used to target airstrikes in the course of an invasion of Gaza that has claimed the lives of tens of thousands, the majority of them civilians. Microsoft declined to comment on the recent Guardian allegations concerning Unit 8200 when approached by RPS, but have previously insisted that their own internal reporting has found "no evidence to date that Microsoft’s Azure and AI technologies have been used to target or harm people in the conflict in Gaza."
The protest at Microsoft's campus was brief. According to the Guardian, current and former staff declared one area a 'Free Zone', and occupied it with placards that read "Join The Worker Intifada - No Labor for Genocide" and "Martyred Palestinian Children's Plaza".
On the eve of Gamescom, Microsoft workers occupy the Xbox company's campus in protest at dealings with the Israeli military
In the run-up to Xbox events at Gamescom police have dispersed a protest about Microsoft's Israeli military dealings at the company's Redmond, Washington HQ.Edwin Evans-Thirlwell (Rock Paper Shotgun)
The AI-Powered PDF Marks the End of an Era
As Adobe rolls out more generative AI features for the PDF, the era of chatbot-less software is firmly a thing of the past.
https://www.wired.com/story/adobe-ai-powered-pdf-end-of-an-era/
Delta Air Lines Boeing 737-800 Grounded After Wing Flap Partially Breaks Off Inflight
A Delta jetliner suffers a scary mechanical failure.
like this
adhocfungus e Raoul Duke like this.
One note is that this plane was leased to WestJet for two years, between 2000 and 2002. The harsh winter weather in Canada, combined with the humid heat of Florida would also have increased the environmental factors that increase maintenance requirements.
Lolwut? Man, I need to stop reading simpleflying.com They are terrible.
Plenty of aircraft based in North America constantly fly from the Deep South (South America) to Canada, to Hawaii, to all points in between and don't have "environmental factors".
Get out of here with this shit, SimpleFlying.
P.S. yes, extreme cold is a bitch. -40°c wrecks tires and other stuff. Not applicable 20+ years and multiple heavy checks later.
WestJet | Simple Flying
Since commencing flights in 1996, WestJet has grown to become Canada’s second-largest airline with over 100 destinations in its network.WestJet
Man, I need to stop reading simpleflying.com They are terrible.
They really went to shit in the last year. But it's hard to find other sources that offer RSS feed. Would you have any recommendations?
Flight disruptions after man sets fire inside Milan Malpensa Terminal 1
In the morning of Wednesday, August 20th, passengers at Milan Malpensa’s Terminal 1 were forced to evacuate the building after a 28-year-old man from Mali destructed television screens with a hammer and set part of a check-in counter on fire by pouring flammable liquid on top of it.
Boeing Set To Sell 500 Jets To China In Massive Trade Deal
Boeing's shares have risen as a result of the reports.
Boeing to Sell 500 Jets To China In Major Trade Deal
The agreement could help Boeing regain market share lost to Airbus in recent years.Jake Hardiman (Simple Flying)
more than cheap enough to throw a year at it.
I've honestly never wanted anything you couldn't find on public trackers though, but was still worth the experience figuring it all out.
Why the time limit?
Definitely going to avoid it, tired of platforms thinking they deserve exclusivity.
Inside the Underground Trade of ‘Flipper Zero’ Tech to Break into Cars
The tech used here is the popular Flipper Zero, an ethical hacker’s swiss army knife, capable of all sorts of things such as WiFi attacks or emulating NFC tags. Now, 404 Media has found an underground trade where much shadier hackers sell extra software and patches for the Flipper Zero to unlock all manner of cars, including models popular in the U.S. The hackers say the tool can be used against Ford, Audi, Volkswagen, Subaru, Hyundai, Kia, and several other brands, including sometimes dozens of specific vehicle models, with no easy fix from car manufacturers.
Inside the Underground Trade of ‘Flipper Zero’ Tech to Break into Cars
A man holds an orange and white device in his hand, about the size of his palm, with an antenna sticking out. He enters some commands with the built-in buttons, then walks over to a nearby car. At first, its doors are locked, and the man tugs on one of them unsuccessfully. He then pushes a button on the gadget in his hand, and the door now unlocks.The tech used here is the popular Flipper Zero, an ethical hacker’s swiss army knife, capable of all sorts of things such as WiFi attacks or emulating NFC tags. Now, 404 Media has found an underground trade where much shadier hackers sell extra software and patches for the Flipper Zero to unlock all manner of cars, including models popular in the U.S. The hackers say the tool can be used against Ford, Audi, Volkswagen, Subaru, Hyundai, Kia, and several other brands, including sometimes dozens of specific vehicle models, with no easy fix from car manufacturers.
💡
Do you know anything else about people using the Flipper Zero to break into cars? I would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message me securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send me an email at joseph@404media.co.These tools are primarily sold for a fee, keeping their distribution somewhat limited to those willing to pay. But, there is the looming threat that this software may soon reach a wider audience of thieves. Straight Arrow News (SAN) previously covered the same tech in July, and the outlet said it successfully tested the tool on a vehicle. Now people are cracking the software, meaning it can be used for free. Discord servers with hundreds of members are seeing more people join, with current members trolling the newbies with fake patches and download links. If the tech gets out, it threatens to supercharge car thefts across the country, especially those part of the social media phenomenon known as Kia Boys in which young men, often in Milwaukee, steal and joyride Kia and Hyundai cars specifically because of the vehicles’ notoriously poor security. Apply that brazeness to all of the other car models the Flipper Zero patches can target, and members of the car hacking community expect thieves to start using the easy to source gadget.
Upgrade to continue reading
Become a paid member to get access to all premium content
UpgradeInside the Underground Trade of ‘Flipper Zero’ Tech to Break into Cars
“Kia Boys will be Flipper Boys by 2026,” one person in the reverse engineering community said.Joseph Cox (404 Media)
like this
adhocfungus, Rozaŭtuno, frustrated_phagocytosis, Maeve, essell e ElcaineVolta like this.
Technology reshared this.
like this
themadcodger e Atelopus-zeteki like this.
like this
rem26_art e Atelopus-zeteki like this.
I use it at work to clone a customer's proximity card when I work in their building so they don't have to leave me theirs to get around. The one legitimate use I found.
I guess being able to trigger the customer service announcement without having to find a button in a store is nice.
Oh, absolutely. It's not something which should be encouraged, and against a well designed modern system it probably isn't possible (there must be some challenge-response type NFC systems on the market).
I'm just saying it isn't unambiguously "illegitimate"
there must be some challenge-response type NFC systems on the market
There are. Hotels use them for door key cards so they can't be cloned.
le·git·i·mate adjective /ləˈjidəmət/
1. conforming to the law or to rules."Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" - Aleister Crowley
seems legit to me…
That's the definition of a legitimate use.
Cloning keycards temporarily with permission (until new ones are made.) Breaking into your own or a friend's car because the keys were left inside (until you get the keys back)
Cloning a TV remote just to lower the volume to a sane degree and turn it off (until they get a new TV, remote or find the old one).
Legitimate is a anything that you're allowed to do. It's a simple process to test legitimacy:
Did someone ask you if you can help?
If yes, did you tell them what you'd do?
If yes, did they agree?
And once you did whatever it was they agreed to, did you keep your ability to do the same thing in the aim of doing something they didn't consent to (once you cloned their car key, do you plan on stealing the car? Or once you cloned their remote, do you have an insatiable urge to fuck with them by abusing the remote?)
If you answer "yes" to all except the last one, the use is legitimate in 99.9% of cases.
The only reason this may be considered a non-legitimate use would be if you attached the exclusive economic right of making repairs or new keys to the OEM, which isn't how a sane world works.
And besides, tools like the Flipper truly are hacking tools. Today hacking has a bad rep, and the word used to mean more like hack something together.
Imagine Bob who is a DIY type of guy. His TV starts falling apart because the plastic casing broke. Bob takes some duct tape and glues the casing together. As the TV stand is also a bit wonky, he takes some screws as well just to be safe. He doesn't plan on keeping it for too long, just until he can find a fitting replacement that's not too expensive. Most likely, he's bound to keep it until the next Black Friday.
Bob just successfully hacked something up to keep his TV from falling apart.
That's the origin of the word "hacking". "To hack up" got shortened by attaching a new meaning to the verb, without bothering with the entire phrase, and making it relate only to electronic/digital hacking. So the TV example isn't hacking, but it is hacking up. It means "to make some temporary fix until a proper one isn't found".
Today, hacking has been conflated with exploiting and breaking digital locks, which is not what the original phrase meant.
Yes, which is why it's weird they were able to steal it, gol'dang time travelers. No I wasn't mistaken, time travelers. No I'm not bias because Warren Zevon rules, I said time travelers.
"Drop his donuts" means his dough circles fell off a table during the studio recording. You can hear him say "my donuts! Goddamn!" in the back of the track, it's hilarious.
Right at the 4:10 mark lmao
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.www.youtube.com
like this
themadcodger, Atelopus-zeteki, qupada, Maeve e Rascal7748 like this.
"What changed?"
"We made them super easy to steal"
like this
Rascal7748 likes this.
like this
themadcodger likes this.
Prentending to be hackerman is a legit usecase IMHO. They do seem like fun, but I personally can't justify the cost.
I would definitely play with one if I had one
It is true that this device can be used nefariously. But it's just a computer with a wide variety of very basic and common communication methods along with software to exploit them. There are many other computers like it that are just less popular. And to ban it is to ban said basic communication hardware like radio, WiFi, NFC, etc.
The solution is to mandate companies to provide a minimum level of security. Even giant companies with good reputations have giant security holes, like Apple or your bank, implementing mandatory SMS as 2FA. That shit should be illegal.
It is almost like their should be something written down somewhere. Like a guideline or rule or something...
Oh that is right, it is called a regulation requiring basic wireless security for extremely expensive consumer items.
Nope can't do that.
Won't someone think of the multi billion dollar corporations‽
Of course, this particular attack actually "works" with rolling codes (WILL desync your real keyfob), it requires the attacker to sniff one signal off your key (incl lock) and then they can spoof your key's rollover protocol (and any button, not just the one they sniffed) to reset the rolling code back to 0 and allowing them access. Iirc it's different from a standard replay attack in (definitely) that it can spoof other keys on the fob it hasn't read, and (I think) that while a trad replay attack requires the car not to hear the signal when recording I believe that doesn't matter with this attack.
Unfortunately I haven't been able to test it out since I'm not buying a serial locked flipper firmware from some guy who just got out of prison selling it on telegram.
If you literally never press the buttons, nor leave your keys alone with anyone else who could possibly push the buttons?
Then a guy with a $20 car unlock kit from Autozone can still get in. And so can a guy with a hammer, and a guy with a broken spark plug. Locks are suggestions, especially when you have windows.
And that's not even to mention people with actual SDRs that can repeat your key's signal and remote start your car, keep your fob in a faraday bag.
locksmith
OH you know what's up for sure then lmao.
Yeah tbh there's nothing a flipper can do that you can't do with a better tool, it just rolls a bunch of stuff into a digital swiss army knife of sorts. It's not something a real car thief would use, maybe someone would use it to break into your car and steal something but a car thief would have something purpose built, or just go low tech if they can. You can run marauder on it too with the wifi board though lol.
TBF most of these are failures and exploits on older devices.
Which are a dime a dozen across the entire industry. Security is rather difficult, especially when considering exploits and bugs.
Ofc many of these ARE the results of cut corners, though many are just a lack of security awareness or old devices with known exploits discovered long after manufacturing.
202w wrangler
Well, Jeep is not really a name for good innovation. They are stuck with a management that still thinks "mechanics" and sees electronics as a pure profit center, not as a gear in the system that has to be as reliable as the rest of it.
That doesn't require buying a special device, it was mostly crimes of convenience. I doubt the Flipper Zero will ever get that widespread.
I see this article more about reporting unfortunate news rather than boosting fear. The news seems to be "Car manufacturers don't take security seriously and people are exploiting it with a simple tool".
I'd rather hear about this now than wake up one day to see that my flipper is illegal because some politician watched a tiktok video.
I don't think it's merely "reporting unfortunate news"
It's about the flipper zero, not really about car theft per say and shitty, evil car security system where the dealer scams you as much as the thief for a key.
There's really no reason we can't use contactless smartcards for this, and that we can't program them ourselves with open source software.
The flipper zero itself is completely irrelevant about this. It's just a generic ISM band transceiver ... Only of note to the ignorant and technologically incompetent, but the journos have made this the centerpiece of the article.
This article convinced me to buy a flipper (I've been debating it for years). It's a super useful item that is absolutely going to get banned/hamstrung any day now for putting too much power into people's hands under the guise of "public safety".
I want it because it's so easy to use. I'm no hacker, but with a tool as convenient as this I'm sure I can piece some useful hacks together.
Although, ordering one before they reban it again may or may not be something to consider.
It's cool but not magic. If you're trying to fuck with something, you need to know what frequency it's on and what sort of signals do what. There is a bunch of preloaded stuff though, and a wide variety of tools like radio frequencies, nfc, Bluetooth, rfid, and infrared. So far the most useful thing I've done is turn the volume down on fox News on tvs in public areas.
Oh one thing I still have to try: some, maybe most handicap buttons for doors are actually radio frequency based and not hard wired, so if you can capture and replay the open signal, you could open a door without hitting the button and look totally jedi.
I hate it when they always add "ethical". First of all, when you say ethical you mean law-fearing, they don't really care about ethics and, secondly, "regular" hackers use it too, so it's just a hacker's swiss army knife...
Dude, do you want individual hacking to become illegal? Because people who are not hacking daily are prone to forgetting that some hackers don't actually act maliciously.
Also, yes, some hackers are ethical and do care. Not you, obviously. But some.
That's what you think is good about hacking? That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works. That's what you get when you get your education from TV.
Hacking means "misusing/modifying crap to work how you want".
Ethical hacking is e.g. modifying devices you own to run software you want, like e.g. running homebrew software on a game console. It is finding and reporting security vulnerabilities so that companies can improve their security. It is modifying software or devices to e.g. removing privacy problems or tracking.
And ethical hacking and law-abiding hacking aren't the same either, since some ethical hacking activities might be illegal (e.g. violating restrictions on modifying devices) and some legal hacking activities might not be ethical (e.g. using legal hacking to dox people).
And ethical hacking and law-abiding hacking aren't the same either
I prefer saying 'grey hat' instead of 'ethical hacker' because ethical hacker is now used to mean 'pentester', 'red teamer' and all the other cybersecurity stuff, or so it seems to me.
that was the entire meaning of my comment, I clearly didn't make it clear enough.
China cut itself off from the global internet on Wednesday
Activist group Great Firewall Report spotted the outage, which it said disrupted all traffic to TCP port 443 – the standard port used for carrying HTTPS traffic.
“Between approximately 00:34 and 01:48 (Beijing Time, UTC+8) on August 20, 2025, the Great Firewall of China (GFW) exhibited anomalous behavior by unconditionally injecting forged TCP RST+ACK packets to disrupt all connections on TCP port 443,” the group wrote in a Wednesday post.
That disruption meant Chinese netizens couldn’t reach most websites hosted outside China, which is inconvenient. The incident also blocked other services that rely on port 443, which could be more problematic because many services need to communicate with servers or sources of information outside China for operational reasons. For example, Apple and Tesla use the port to connect to offshore servers that power some of their basic services.
China cut itself off from the global internet for an hour on Wednesday
: Great Firewall took out all traffic to port 443 at a time Beijing didn't have an obvious need to keep its netizens in the darkSimon Sharwood (The Register)
like this
adhocfungus, Rozaŭtuno, Atelopus-zeteki, NoneOfUrBusiness, Raoul Duke e wagesj45 like this.
Technology reshared this.
like this
Lawelen e NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
Yeah technically anything can run on any ports, we just like to default certain things.
Ssh for example can work on port 2000 or whatever. Port knocking is fun too.
VPNs, DNS over https (DoH), load balancers via DHCP, encrypted remote procedure calls, TCP pipes via gsocket.
I could go on.
HTTPS may be the official designation for the port, but it is the de facto standard port for TLS. Whatever you want to send over TLS, doesn't really matter.
HTTPS is just HTTP served over TLS (originally SSL).
Step by step, if you were to analyze a web connection over port 443, you would see that the client first negotiates the TCP connection (via three-way handshake), then TLS, and it's not till after TLS is established that HTTPS is negotiated.
In that way, it's kinda wrong to say it's the HTTPS port. It's really, nowadays, the TLS port. HTTP is just one of many protocols that can ride on top of it, and when we do that, we call it HTTPS.
like this
Nougat likes this.
Sometimes mandatory web proxies still allow direct connections to port 443 so as to not break https, which in return means as long as your connection is to port 443, that proxy will pass it through without interfering.
I used to run sshd on port 443 for this reason back when I regularly had to work from client networks.
like this
onewithoutaname e NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
My friend, this post is about China getting cut off from the rest of the word, most likely due to government censorship.
The title of this community is Technology.
It is a PSA about the current steps the US is taking towards similar levels of censorship. This is pretty damn relevant to both the community and the post topic.
I know some people don't like it, but politics is part of tons of different communities. Even a crafting community would be affected by the current tariffs.
For example, in China the film industry censors LGBT-related films. Filmmakers must resort to finding funds from international investors such as the "Ford Foundations" and or produce through an independent film company.
Good read. Fuck censorship. Fuck the CCP.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
like this
qupada likes this.
Enjoy the freedom of having the likes of Meta and Google pull another Cambridge analytica. Or the freedom of having multi-billion dollar companies like YouTube aggressively push algorithms that steer people down the alt right pipeline. Or the freedom of instagram mechanically and ruthlessly instilling in children as much body dysphoria and low self esteem as possible in the name of profit.
It was literally only two years ago that Meta ~~was~~ got caught promoting racial violence in Myanmar. amnesty.org/en/latest/news/202…
Any reasonable person can look at the heinous acts carried out by western tech companies in recent years and realize that the great firewall has been vindicated.
Edit: "CCP shill", "whataboutism", "two things can be bad"... come on folks, its time to start thinking of some new thought-terminating cliches. These are so 2023.
I think they just copy paste this stuff.
You can tell because it's a completely non-sequitur. They don't even bother tailing their ramblings to the conversation currently being had. They just control + c, control + v it into place, and then act like they've achieved something.
Yeah they don't understand this stuff. They don't even know what a VPN is they're just angry about it.
Actually doing this would be devastating to the economy, and anyway they still need to justify their actions. They can't be openly dictatorial just yet.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
Not HTTPS necessarily, but lots use TLS over 443. If you are sending something like login credentials to an online service, it makes sense for the servers to use what is universally available instead of reinventing the wheel. Also, some games may use a launcher that uses HTTPS if they are web-based in some fashion, or maybe the game will use it for certain kinds of API calls unrelated to actual gameplay.
If you are playing a game that uses a dedicated server (or just isn't a competitive game at all), then TLS usage is probably unlikely, but those games aren't lucrative for the account boosting/currency farming that makes cheating so rampant in China anyway.
Even signing up for some games requires you to create an account on their website first.
More. I play in oceania and the cheaters are always english speakers.
Edit: the things you get downvoted for here. should've checked the instance before I commented.
Revealed: Israeli military’s own data indicates civilian death rate of 83%
Figures from a classified Israeli military intelligence database indicate five out of six Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in Gaza have been civilians, an extreme rate of slaughter rarely matched in recent decades of warfare.
As of May, 19 months into the war, Israeli intelligence officials listed 8,900 named fighters from Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as dead or “probably dead”, a joint investigation by the Guardian, the Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine and the Hebrew-language outlet Local Call has found.
At that time 53,000 Palestinians had been killed by Israeli attacks, according to health authorities in Gaza, a toll that included combatants and civilians. Fighters named in the Israeli military intelligence database accounted for just 17% of the total, which indicates that 83% of the dead were civilians.
Revealed: Israeli military’s own data indicates civilian death rate of 83% in Gaza war
Figures from classified IDF database listed 8,900 named fighters as dead or probably dead in May, as overall death toll reached 53,000Emma Graham-Harrison (The Guardian)
Trying to get Star Trek Bridge Crew working on linux, but ubisoft connect keeps giving me connection error.
Was hoping to give this game a shot, even though it is practically abandonware at this point.
I downloaded the ARMGDDN repack/crack of star trek bridge crew. I was able to test it on a windows partition to see if online still worked. On the windows partition not only was I able to get past the ubisoft connect error, but I can also create private matches and join public ones as well. So that gave me a sliver of hope in getting it working on linux!
It seems people have luck with a legitimate copy of bridge crew on protondb.
I transferred the files to my personal linux rig and tried proton, bottles, and lutris. No dice. The game opens but says "connection error, unable to connect to uplay service". I think it specifically has to do with the emudata folder inside the game folder. It is the folder with what seems to be cracked ubisoft connect credentials, but when I launch the game through proton or wine it doesn't even look for that folder/files.
Any help to rid me of this connection error is appreciated!
Edit: the error is in the game. The game is able to launch, and it can even be launched in vr. It asks you for controller input from a headset or gamepad. Once you do it flashes "connecting..." For a few seconds and then gives you the "could not connect to uplay" error. On windows when you launch and confirm input it just loads right in.
Edit 2: I have tried using the repack installer executable instead of the installed game files from the windows partition. I attempted this with both proton and lutris and still no luck.
I have also found that the ARMGDDN repack installer did not install ubisoft connect on the windows partition, it seems to have just supplied the ubisoftconnectinstaller.exe and done nothing else with it.
Edit 3: it has to do with dll injection of some sort. i am having yhe same issue with a mod on another gsme not properly injecting the dlls that come with it. So I assume this crack comes with dlls that are not injecting properly on launch. I have no idea how to get it to properly inject the needed dll files. I am also unsure as to which dlls are responsible for bypassing ubisoft connect.
Yeah I had switched the exe to the ubisoft connect installer provided by the repack. It installed but it still didn't detect. Then I tried bottles and installing ubisoft connect in the "install an application" portion. Still nothing. I did notice that on the windows machine I have, it doesn't seem like the repack installed ubisoft connect on the device. At least nothing I could find in control panel.
So I do not know why linux is asking for ubisoft connect yet windows runs the game with no ubisoft connect application installed.
Jimmy Wales Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'
Paywall bypass: archive.is/oWcIr
Jimmy Wales Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'
Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, thinks the internet’s default encyclopedia and one of the world’s biggest repositories of information could benefit from some applications of AI. The volunteer editors who keep Wikipedia functioning strongly disagree with him.The ongoing debate about incorporating AI into Wikipedia in various forms bubbled up again in July, when Wales posted an idea to his Wikipedia User Talk Page about how the platform could use a large language model as part of its article creation process.
Any Wikipedia user can create a draft of an article. That article is then reviewed by experienced Wikipedia editors who can accept the draft and move it to Wikipedia’s “mainspace,” which makes up the bulk of Wikipedia and the articles you’ll find when you’re searching for information. Reviewers can also reject articles for a variety of reasons, but because hundreds of draft articles are submitted to Wikipedia every day, volunteer reviewers often use a tool called articles for creation/helper script (ACFH), which creates templates for common reasons articles are declined.
This is where Wales thinks AI could help. He wrote that he was asked to look at a specific draft article and give notes that might help the article get published.
“I was eager to do so because I'm always interested in taking a fresh look at our policies and procedures to look for ways they might be improved,” he wrote. “The person asking me felt frustrated at the minimal level of guidance being given (this is my interpretation, not necessarily theirs) and having reviewed it, I can see why.”
Wales explains that the article was originally rejected several years ago, then someone tried to improve it, resubmitted it, and got the same exact template rejection again.
“It's a form letter response that might as well be ‘Computer says no’ (that article's worth a read if you don't know the expression),” Wales said. “It wasn't a computer who says no, but a human using AFCH, a helper script [...] In order to try to help, I personally felt at a loss. I am not sure what the rejection referred to specifically. So I fed the page to ChatGPT to ask for advice. And I got what seems to me to be pretty good. And so I'm wondering if we might start to think about how a tool like AFCH might be improved so that instead of a generic template, a new editor gets actual advice. It would be better, obviously, if we had lovingly crafted human responses to every situation like this, but we all know that the volunteers who are dealing with a high volume of various situations can't reasonably have time to do it. The templates are helpful - an AI-written note could be even more helpful.”
Wales then shared the output he got from ChatGPT. It included more details than a template rejection, but editors replying to Wales noted that it was also filled with errors.
For example, the response suggested the article cite a source that isn’t included in the draft article, and rely on Harvard Business School press releases for other citations, despite Wikipedia policies explicitly defining press releases as non-independent sources that cannot help prove notability, a basic requirement for Wikipedia articles.
Editors also found that the ChatGPT-generated response Wales shared “has no idea what the difference between” some of these basic Wikipedia policies, like notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), and properly representing minority and more widely held views on subjects in an article (WP:WEIGHT).
“Something to take into consideration is how newcomers will interpret those answers. If they believe the LLM advice accurately reflects our policies, and it is wrong/inaccurate even 5% of the time, they will learn a skewed version of our policies and might reproduce the unhelpful advice on other pages,” one editor said.
Wales and editors proceeded to get into it in the replies to his article. The basic disagreement is that Wales thinks that LLMs can be useful to Wikipedia, even if they are sometimes wrong, while editors think an automated system that is sometimes wrong is fundamentally at odds with the human labor and cooperation that makes Wikipedia so valuable to begin with.
As one editor writes:
“The reputational risk to adding in AI-generated slop feedback can not be overstated. The idea that we will feed drafts into a large language model - with all the editorial and climate implications and without oversight or accountability - is insane. What are we gaining in return? Verbose, emoji-laden boilerplate slop, often wrong in substance or tone, and certainly lacking in the care and contextual sensitivity that actual human editors bring to review work. Worse it creates a dangerous illusion of helpfulness, where the appearance of tailored advice masks the lack of genuine editorial engagement. We would be feeding and legitimising a system that replaces mentoring, discourages human learning, and cheapens the standards we claim to uphold. That's the antithesis of Wikipedia, no?”
“It is definitely not the antithesis of Wikipedia to use technology in appropriate ways to make the encyclopedia better,” Wales responded. “We have a clearly identifiable problem, and you've elaborated on it well: the volume of submissions submits templated responses, and we shouldn't ask reviewers to do more. But we should look for ways to support and help them.”
Wikipedia Prepares for ‘Increase in Threats’ to US Editors From Musk and His Allies
The Wikimedia Foundation says it will likely roll out features previously used to protect editors in authoritarian countries more widely.404 MediaJason Koebler
This isn’t the first time the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit that manages Wikipedia, and Wikipedia editors have clashed about AI. In June, the Wikimedia Foundation paused an experiment to use AI-generated summaries at the top of Wikipedia articles after a backlash from editors.A group of Wikipedia editors have also started WikiProject AI Cleanup, an organized effort to protect the platform from what they say is growing number of AI-generated articles and images submitted to Wikipedia that are misleading or include errors. In early August, Wikipedia editors also adopted a new policy that will make it easier for them to delete articles that are clearly AI-generated.
playlist.megaphone.fm?p=TBIEA2…
“Wikipedia’s strength has been and always will be its human-centered, volunteer-driven model — one where knowledge is created and reviewed by people, volunteers from different countries, perspectives, and backgrounds. Research shows that this process of human debate, discussion, and consensus makes for higher-quality articles on Wikipedia,” a Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson told me in an email. “Nevertheless, machine-generated content is exploding across the internet, and it will inevitably make its way to Wikipedia. Wikipedia volunteers have showcased admirable resilience in maintaining the reliability of information on Wikipedia based on existing community-led policies and processes, sometimes leveraging AI/machine learning tools in this work.“The spokesperson said that Wikipedia already uses AI productively, like with bots that revert vandalism and machine translation tools, and that these tools always have a “human in the loop” to validate automated work.
“As the founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy regularly engages with volunteers on his talk page to share ideas, test assumptions, and respond to questions,” the spokesperson said. ”His recent comments about how AI could improve the draft review process are an example of this and a prompt for further community conversation."
How AI-generated text is poisoning the internet
Plus: A Roomba recorded a woman on the toilet. How did screenshots end up on Facebook?Melissa Heikkilä (MIT Technology Review)
like this
adhocfungus, Rozaŭtuno, Endymion_Mallorn, yessikg, Lasslinthar, essell, TVA e Maeve like this.
Technology reshared this.
like this
yessikg e onewithoutaname like this.
like this
onewithoutaname likes this.
I think commenters here don't actually do Wikipedia. Wales was instrumental in Wikipedia's principles and organization besides the first year of Sanger. He handpicked the first administrators to make sure the project would continue its anarchistic roganization and prevent a hierarchy from having a bigger say in content matters.
I would characterize Wales as a long-retired leader rather than leadership.
Wales’s quote isn’t nearly as bad as the byline makes it out to be:
Wales explains that the article was originally rejected several years ago, then someone tried to improve it, resubmitted it, and got the same exact template rejection again.“It's a form letter response that might as well be ‘Computer says no’ (that article's worth a read if you don't know the expression),” Wales said. “It wasn't a computer who says no, but a human using AFCH, a helper script [...] In order to try to help, I personally felt at a loss. I am not sure what the rejection referred to specifically. So I fed the page to ChatGPT to ask for advice. And I got what seems to me to be pretty good. And so I'm wondering if we might start to think about how a tool like AFCH might be improved so that instead of a generic template, a new editor gets actual advice. It would be better, obviously, if we had lovingly crafted human responses to every situation like this, but we all know that the volunteers who are dealing with a high volume of various situations can't reasonably have time to do it. The templates are helpful - an AI-written note could be even more helpful.”
That being said, it still reeks of “CEO Speak.” And trying to find a place to shove AI in.
More NLP could absolutely be useful to Wikipedia, especially for flagging spam and malicious edits for human editors to review. This is an excellent task for dirt cheap, small and open models, where an error rate isn’t super important. Cost, volume, and reducing stress on precious human editors is. It's a existential issue that needs work.
…Using an expensive, proprietary API to give error prone yet “pretty good” sounding suggestions to new editors is not.
Wasting dev time trying to make it work is not.
This is the problem. Not natural language processing itself, but the seemingly contagious compulsion among executives to find some place to shove it when the technical extent of their knowledge is occasionally typing something into ChatGPT.
It’s okay for them to not really understand it.
It’s not okay to push it differently than other technology because “AI” is somehow super special and trendy.
like this
Aatube, onewithoutaname e TVA like this.
That being said, it still wreaks of “CEO Speak.”
I think you mean reeks, which means to stink, having a foul odor.
That being said, it still wreaks of “CEO Speak.” And trying to find a place to shove AI in.
I don't see how this is "shoved in." Wales identified a situation where Wikipedia's existing non-AI process doesn't work well and then realized that adding AI assistance could improve it.
Neither did Wales. Hence, the next part of the article:
For example, the response suggested the article cite a source that isn’t included in the draft article, and rely on Harvard Business School press releases for other citations, despite Wikipedia policies explicitly defining press releases as non-independent sources that cannot help prove notability, a basic requirement for Wikipedia articles.Editors also found that the ChatGPT-generated response Wales shared “has no idea what the difference between” some of these basic Wikipedia policies, like notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), and properly representing minority and more widely held views on subjects in an article (WP:WEIGHT).
“Something to take into consideration is how newcomers will interpret those answers. If they believe the LLM advice accurately reflects our policies, and it is wrong/inaccurate even 5% of the time, they will learn a skewed version of our policies and might reproduce the unhelpful advice on other pages,” one editor said.
It doesn't mean the original process isn't problematic, or can't be helpfully augmented with some kind of LLM-generated supplement. But this is like a poster child of a troublesome AI implementation: where a general purpose LLM needs understanding of context it isn't presented (but the reader assumes it has), where hallucinations have knock-on effects, and where even the founder/CEO of Wikipedia seemingly missed such errors.
Don't mistake me for being blanket anti-AI, clearly it's a tool Wikipedia can use. But the scope has to be narrow, and the problem specific.
like this
onewithoutaname likes this.
This is another reason why I hate bubbles. There is something potentially useful in here. It needs to be considered very carefully. However, it gets to a point where everyone's kneejerk reaction is that it's bad.
I can't even say that people are wrong for feeling that way. The AI bubble has affected our economy and lives in a multitude of ways that go far beyond any reasonable use. I don't blame anyone for saying "everything under this is bad, period". The reasonable uses of it are so buried in shit that I don't expect people to even bother trying to reach into that muck to clean it off.
This bubble's hate is pretty front-loaded though.
Dotcom was, well, a useful thing. I guess valuations were nuts, but it looks like the hate was mostly in the enshittified aftermath that would come.
Crypto is a series of bubbles trying to prop up flavored pyramid schemes for a neat niche concept, but people largely figured that out after they popped. And it's not as attention grabbing as AI.
Machine Learning is a long running, useful field, but ever since ChatGPT caught investors eyes, the cart has felt so far ahead of the horse. The hate started, and got polarized, waaay before the bubble popping.
...In other words, AI hate almost feels more political than bubble fueled. If that makes any sense. It is a bubble, but the extreme hate would still be there even if it wasn't.
Crypto was an annoying bubble. If you were in the tech industry, you had a couple of years where people asked you if you could add blockchain to whatever your project was and then a few more years of hearing about NFTs. And GPUs shot up in price. Crypto people promised to revolutionize banking and then get rich quick schemes. It took time for the hype to die down, for people to realize that the tech wasn't useful, and that the costs of running it weren't worth it.
The AI bubble is different. The proponents are gleeful while they explain how AI will let you fire all your copywriters, your graphics designers, your programmers, your customer support, etc. Every company is trying to figure out how to shoehorn AI into their products. While AI is a useful tool, the bubble around it has hurt a lot of people.
That's the bubble side. It also gets a lot of baggage because of the slop generated by it, the way it's trained, the power usage, the way people just turn off their brains and regurgitate whatever it says, etc. It's harder to avoid than crypto.
Yeah, you're right. My thoughts were kinda uncollected.
Though I will argue some of the negatives (like inference power usage) are massively overstated, and even if they aren't, are just the result of corporate enshittification more than the AI bubble itself.
Even the large scale training is apparently largely useless: old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/co…
I believe that the bad behavior of corporate interests is often one of the key contributors to these financial bubbles in every sector where they appear.
To say that some of the bad things about this particular financial bubble are because of a bunch of companies being irresponsible and/or unethical seems not to acknowledge that one is primarily caused by the other.
"The metaverse" changed it's definition depending on who you talked to. Some definitions didn't even include VR.
"AI" also changes it's definition depending on who you talk to.
Vague definitions = hype
So... I actually proposed a use case for NLP and LLMs in 2017. I don't actually know if it was used.
But the usecase was generating large sets of fake data that looked real enough for performance testing enterprise sized data transformations. That way we could skip a large portion of the risk associated with using actual customer data. We wouldn't have to generate the data beforehand, we could validate logic with it, and we could just plop it in the replica non-prodiction environment.
At the time we didn't have any LLMs. So it didn't go anywhere. But it's always funny when I see all this "LLMs can do x" because I always think about how my proposal was to use it... For fake data.
like this
OfCourseNot, frustrated_phagocytosis, yessikg, TVA e Lawelen like this.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
The problem with LLMs and other generative AI is that they're not completely useless. People's jobs are on the line much of the time, so it would really help if they were completely useless, but they're not. Generative AI is certainly not as good as its proponents claim, and critically, when it fucks up, it can be extremely hard for a human to tell, which eats away a lot of their benefits, but they're not completely useless. For the most basic example, give an LLM a block of text and ask it how to improve grammar or to make a point clearer, and then compare the AI generated result with the original, and take whatever parts you think the AI improved.
Everybody knows this, but we're all pretending it's not the case because we're caring people who don't want the world to be drowned in AI hallucinations, we don't want to have the world taken over by confidence tricksters who just fake everything with AI, and we don't want people to lose their jobs. But sometimes, we are so busy pretending that AI is completely useless that we forget that it actually isn't completely useless. The reason they're so dangerous is that they're not completely useless.
like this
TVA likes this.
It’s almost as if nuance and context matters.
How much energy does a human use to write a Wikipedia article? Now also measure the accuracy and completeness of the article.
Now do the same for AI.
Objective metrics are what is missing, because much of what we hear is “phd-level inference” and it’s still just a statistical, probabilistic generator.
like this
TVA likes this.
It is completely useless as presented by the major players who atrocities trying to jam models that are trying to everything at the same time and that is what we always talk about when discussing AI.
We aren't talking about focused implementations that are Wikipedia to a certain set of data or designed for specific purposes. That is why we don't need nuance, although the reminder that we aren't talking about smaller scale AI used by humans as tools is nice once in a while.
like this
TVA likes this.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis e TVA like this.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
While this is true, the majority of the wikis are not at all low quality. Some are the only ones existing for a topic. The wikis are community-based, after all.
But its easy to vandalize and is highly profit-driven. The fandom wikis are filled with ads that absolutely destroy navigation. Infamous is the video ad that scrolls you up automatically in the middle of reading once it finishes. You have to pause it to read the article with no interruption.
like this
Lawelen likes this.
There's an addon for that, Indie Wiki Buddy.
It tries to redirect you to non fandom/fextralife wikis if they exist, and if not, it proxies fandom wikis through BreezeWiki which just displays the content.
And I'll take this opportunity to plug Hohser and the uBlock AI blocklist as well.
Indie Wiki Buddy
Indie Wiki Buddy, a browser extension to help you find quality, independent wikisIndie Wiki Buddy
Oh yeah that website's pretty great
It has really in depth wiki about games like
fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Caesar…
So I guess you mean that Wales guy is pretty great then
Yup, Fallout Wiki has a pretty crazy history. I don't remember if they were originally a Fandom wiki, but at some point they definitely went "well, we don't want to go with Fandom, we'll go with Curse wiki host instead." Then Fandom bought Curse wikis and put all of them under Fandom banner anyway.
The independent Fallout Wiki is basically where the actual community is right now, the Fandom wiki is just there to confuse passers-by with their high search engine rank. Fandom has the policy that the community can fork a wiki and go elsewhere, but they will not close down the Fandom wiki, so good luck with your search rankings.
The "fandom" one is much more complete ?
I mean, they're both pretty great,
From the search engine if I wanted to know about in-game faction,
I'd just pick which ever appeared first.
and it'd be fine either way
So why would "Chloé 🥕@lemmy.blahaj.zone"
think they can just point at it and imagine any random people would even know
what she "who that guy is" means just because he's associated with that wiki ?
And that my innocuous comment
would triggers the nerds with such an unanimously negative response ?
like this
Lawelen likes this.
Honestly, translating the good articles from other languages would improve Wikipedia immensely.
For example, the Nanjing dialect article is pretty bare in English and very detailed in Mandarin
You can do that, that's fine. As long as you can verify it is an accurate translation, so you need to know the subject matter and the target language.
But you could probably also have used Google translate and then just fine tune the output yourself. Anyone could have done that at any point in the last 10 years.
As long as you can verify it is an accurate translation
Unless the process has changed in the last decade, article translations are a multi-step process, which includes translators and proof-readers. It's easier to get volunteer proof-readers than volunteer translators. Adding AI for the translation step, but keeping the proof-reading step should be a great help.
But you could probably also have used Google translate and then just fine tune the output yourself. Anyone could have done that at any point in the last 10 years.
Have you ever used Google translate? Putting an entire Wikipedia article through it and then "fine tuning" it would be more work than translating it from scratch. Absolutely no comparison between Google translate and AI translations.
Putting an entire Wikipedia article through it and then "fine tuning" it would be more work than translating it from scratch.
That depends on if you are capable of translating the language if you don't know the language then the translator will give you a good start.
What's funny is that for enormous big systems with network effects we are trying to use mechanisms intended for smaller businesses, like a hot dog kiosk.
IRL we have a thing for those, it's called democracy.
In the Internet it's either anarchy or monarchy, sometimes bureaucratic dictatorship, but in that area even Soviet-style collegial rule is something not yet present.
I'm recently read that McPherson article about Unix and racism, and how our whole perception of correct computing (modularity, encapsulation, object-orientation, all the KISS philosophy even) is based on that time's changes in the society and reaction to those. I mean, real world is continuous and you can quantize it into discrete elements in many ways. Some unfit for your task. All unfit for some task.
So - first, I like the Usenet model.
Second, cryptography is good.
Third, cryptographic ownership of a limited resource is ... fine, blockchains are maybe not so stupid. But not really necessary, because one can choose between a few versions of the same article retrieved, based on web of trust or whatever else. No need to have only one right version.
Fourth, we already have a way to turn sequence of interdependent actions into state information, it's called a filesystem.
Fifth, Unix with its hierarchies is really not the only thing in existence, there's BTRON, and even BeOS had a tagged filesystem.
Sixth, interop and transparency are possible with cryptography.
Seventh, all these also apply to a hypothetical service over global network.
Eighth, of course, is that the global network doesn't have to be globally visible\addressable to operate globally for spreading data, so even the Internet itself is not as much needed as the actual connectivity over which those change messages will propagate where needed and synchronize.
Ninth, for Wikipedia you don't need as much storage as for, say, Internet Archive.
And tenth - with all these one can make a Wikipedia-like decentralized system with democratic government, based on rather primitive principles, other than, of course, cryptography involved.
(Yes, Briar impressed me.)
EDIT: Oh, about democracy - I mean technical democracy. That an event (making any change) weren't valid if not processed correctly, by people eligible for signing it, for example, and they are made eligible by a signed appointment, and those signing it are made eligible by a democratic process (signed by majority of some body, signed in turn). That's that blockchain democracy people dreamed at some point. Maybe that's not a scam. Just haven't been done yet.
How do you use Sybil attack for a system where the initial creator signs the initial voters, and then they collectively sign elections and acceptance of new members and all such stuff?
Doesn't seem to be a problem for a system with authorized voters.
So why would they accept said AI-generated applicants?
If we are making a global system, then confirmation using some nation's ID can be done, with removing fakes found out later. Like with IRL nation states. Or "bring a friend and be responsible if they are a fake". Or both at the same time.
Only if used appropriately and in a safe manner.
Like a summary of article, translations etc
And definitely always highlighting what was generated by the AI
like this
Lawelen likes this.
Oh, right! Thanks for reminding me. I tried to archive it the last time but it took forever.
Edit. There ya' go: archive.is/oWcIr
tbh i somehow didnt even realize that wikipedia is one of the few super popular sites not trying to shove ai down my throat every 5 seconds
i'm grateful now
So I fed the page to ChatGPT to ask for advice. And I got what seems to me to be pretty good. And so I'm wondering if we might start to think about how a tool like AFCH might be improved so that instead of a generic template, a new editor gets actual advice. It would be better, obviously, if we had lovingly crafted human responses to every situation like this, but we all know that the volunteers who are dealing with a high volume of various situations can't reasonably have time to do it. The templates are helpful - an AI-written note could be even more helpful.
This actually sounds like a plausibly decent use for an LLM. Initial revision to take some of the load off from the human review process isn't a bad idea - he isn't advocating for AI to write articles, just that it can be useful for copy-editing and potentially supplement a system already heavy in Go/No Go evaluations.
Which is weird, really. Jimmy Wales is just fucking awful. I didn't realize he was anatomically capable of not talking out of his ass.
In a first, Google has released data on how much energy an AI prompt uses
In a first, Google has released data on how much energy an AI prompt uses
It’s the most transparent estimate yet from one of the big AI companies, and a long-awaited peek behind the curtain for researchers.Casey Crownhart (MIT Technology Review)
like this
Fitik, adhocfungus, Rozaŭtuno e Endymion_Mallorn like this.
Technology reshared this.
Nice share! Mistral also shared data about one of its largest model (not the one that answer in LeChat, since that one is Medium, a smaller model, that I guess has smaller energetic requirements)
like this
FaceDeer likes this.
In total, the median prompt—one that falls in the middle of the range of energy demand—consumes 0.24 watt-hours of electricity, the equivalent of running a standard microwave for about one second. The company also provided average estimates for the water consumption and carbon emissions associated with a text prompt to Gemini.
There are zero downsides when mentally associating an energy hog with "1 second of use time of the device that is routinely used for minutes at a time."
With regard to sugar: when I started counting calories I discovered that the actual amounts of calories in certain foods were not what I intuitively assumed. Some foods turned out to be much less unhealthy than I thought. For example, I can eat almost three pints of ice cream a day and not gain weight (as long as I don't eat anything else). So sometimes instead of eating a normal dinner, I want to eat a whole pint of ice cream and I can do so guilt-free.
Likewise, I use both AI and a microwave, my energy use from AI in a day is apparently less than the energy I use to reheat a cup of tea, so the conclusion that I can use AI however much I want to without significantly affecting my environmental impact is the correct one.
Individually you’re spot on. Your AI use doesn’t matter. But, and this is where companies tend to leave off, when you take into account how many millions (or billions) of times something is done in a day (like AI prompts), then that’s when it genuinely matters.
To me, this is akin to companies trying to pass the blame to consumers when it’s the companies themselves who are the biggest climate offenders.
You’re right. But if I had to pick a why, I’d go with how microwaves at least provide a service for households by heating up food.
AI’s only viable service (at the time of this writing) is a replacement for viagra for techbros when they need to get an erection.
On a "respond to an individual query" level, yeah it's not that much. But prior to response the data center had to be constructed, the entire web had to be scraped, the models trained, the servers continually ran regardless of load. There's also way too many "hidden" queries across the web in general from companies trying to summarize every email or product.
All of that adds to the energy costs. This equivocation is meant to make people feel less bad about the energy impact of using AI, when so much of the cost is in building AI.
Furthermore, that's the median value--the one that falls right in the middle of the quantity of queries. There's a limit to how much less energy a query to the left of the median can use; there's a significantly higher runway to the right of the median for excess energy use. This also only accounted for text queries; images and video generation efforts are gonna use a lot more.
All of that adds to the energy costs
But do you actually know how much that is? Or are you just assuming it's a lot.
You should probably not eat things because of how much calories they have or don't have, but because of how much of their nutrients you need, and how much they lack other, dangerous shit. Also eat slowly until you're full and no more. Also move a lot.
We shouldn't need calculators for this healthy lifestyle.
The reason for needing to know which foods are healthy is because... well, we forgot.
like this
FaceDeer likes this.
like this
yessikg likes this.
Yet they’ve never needed to commission power plants to dedicate power to these facilities.
Never?
In addition:
This report was also strictly limited to text prompts, so it doesn’t represent what’s needed to generate an image or a video.
like this
classic, yessikg e giantpaper like this.
I did some quick math with metas llama model and the training cost was about a flight to Europe worth of energy, not a lot when you take in the amount of people that use it compared to the flight.
Whatever you're imagining as the impact, it's probably a lot less. AI is much closer to video games then things that are actually a problem for the environment like cars, planes, deep sea fishing, mining, etc. The impact is virtually zero if we had a proper grid based on renewable.
like this
FaceDeer e giantpaper like this.
like this
yessikg e giantpaper like this.
like this
giantpaper likes this.
Seriously. I'd be somewhat less concerned about the impact if it was only voluntarily used. Instead, AI is compulsively shoved in every nook and cranny of digital product simply to justify its own existence.
The power requirement for training is ongoing, since mere days after Sam Altman released a very underehelming GPT-5, he begins hyping up the next one.
Because the training has diminishing returns, meaning the small improvements between (for example purposes) GPT 3 and 4 will need exponentially more power to have the same effect on GPT 5. In 2022 and 2023 OpenAI and DeepMind both predicted that reaching human accuracy could never be done, the latter concluding even with infinite power.
So in order to get as close as possible then in the future they will need to get as much power as possible. Academic papers outline it as the one true bottleneck.
Academia literally got cut by more than a third and Microsoft is planning to revive breeder reactors.
You might think academia will work on the problem but the people running these things absolutely do not.
Because demand for data centers is rising, with AI as just one of many reasons.
But that's not as flashy as telling people it takes the energy of a small country to make a picture of a cat.
Also interesting that we're ignoring something here -- big tech is chasing cheap sources of clean energy. Don't we want cheap, clean energy?
like this
imecth likes this.
Yes, yes it did. And as far as I can tell, it's still belching it out, just so magats can keep getting owned by it. What a world
My comment is in the context of this
Also interesting that we’re ignoring something here – big tech is chasing cheap sources of clean energy. Don’t we want cheap, clean energy?
That's not small....
100's of Gigawatts is how much energy that is. Fuel is pretty damn energy dense.
A Boeing 777 might burn 45k Kg of fuel, at a density of 47Mj/kg. Which comes out to... 600 Megawatts
Or about 60 houses energy usage for a year in the U.S.
It's an asinine way to measure it to be fair, not only is it incredibly ambiguous, but almost no one has any reference as to how much energy that actually is.
That's not ~600 Megawatts, it's 587 Megawatt-hours.
Or in other terms that are maybe easier to understand: 5875 fully charged 100kWh Tesla batteries.
I usually liken it to video games, ya. Is it worse that nothing? Sure, but that flight or road trip, etc, is a bigger concern. Not to mention even before AI we've had industrial usage of energy and water usage that isn't sustainable... almonds in CA alone are a bigger problem than AI, for instance.
Not that I'm pro-AI cause it's a huge headache from so many other perspectives, but the environmental argument isn't enough. Corpo greed is probably the biggest argument against it, imo.
A flight to Europe's worth of energy is a pretty asinine way to measure this. Is it not?
It's also not that small the number, being ~600 Megawatts of energy.
However, training cost is considerably less than prompting cost. Making your argument incredibly biased.
Similarly, the numbers released by Google seem artificially low, perhaps their TPUs are massively more efficient given they are ASICs. But they did not seem to disclose what model they are using for this measurement, It could be their smallest, least capable and most energy efficient model which would be disingenuous.
This feels like PR bullshit to make people feel like AI isn't all that bad. Assuming what they're releasing is even true. Not like cigarette, oil, or sugar companies ever lied or anything and put out false studies and misleading data.
However, there are still details that the company isn’t sharing in this report. One major question mark is the total number of queries that Gemini gets each day, which would allow estimates of the AI tool’s total energy demand.
Why wouldn't they release this. Even if each query uses minimal energy, but there are countless of them a day, it would mean a huge use of energy.
Which is probably what's happening and why they're not releasing that number.
like this
giantpaper likes this.
like this
qupada likes this.
median prompt size
Someone didn't pass statistics, but did pass their marketing data presention classes.
Wake me up when they release useful data.
like this
qupada likes this.
It is indeed very suspicious that they talk about "median" and not "average".
For those who don't understand what the difference is, think of the following numbers:
1, 2, 3, 34, 40
The median is 3, because it's in the middle.
The average is 16 (1+2+3+34+40=80, 80/5=16).
like this
qupada likes this.
There were people estimating 40w in earlier threads on lemmy which was ridiculous.
This seems more realistic.
The company has signed agreements to buy over 22 gigawatts of power from sources including solar, wind, geothermal, and advanced nuclear projects since 2010.
None of those advanced nuclear projects are yet actually delivering power, AFAIK. They're mostly in planning stages.
The above isn't all to run AI, of course. Nobody was thinking about datacenters just for AI training in 2010. But to be clear, there are 94 nuclear power plants in the US, and a rule of thumb is that they produce 1GW each. So Google is taking up the equivalent of roughly one quarter of the entire US nuclear power industry, but doing it with solar/wind/geothermal that could be used to drop our fossil fuel dependence elsewhere.
How much of that is used to run AI isn't clear here, but we know it has to be a lot.
None of those advanced nuclear projects are yet actually delivering power, AFAIK.
...and they won't be for at least 5-10 years. In the meantime they'll just use public infrastructure and then when their generation plans fall through they'll just keep doing that.
Ford cambia piani: svolta nella partnership F1 Red Bull dal 2026
A meno di due anni dal ritorno ufficiale in pista, Ford ha annunciato un cambio di piani nella collaborazione con Red Bull per il mondiale 2026.
quotidianomotori.com/formula-1…
Ford cambia piani: svolta nella partnership F1 Red Bull dal 2026 - Quotidiano Motori
Ford annuncia un cambio di strategia: lavorerà anche sul motore termico Red Bull Powertrains per la F1 2026, oltre che sull'elettrico.Mario Roth (Quotidiano Motori)
Commonwealth Bank backtracks on AI job cuts, apologises for 'error'
ABC News
ABC News provides the latest news and headlines in Australia and around the world.Stephanie Chalmers (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Psicologia REM di Michael Raduga: sogni lucidi e crescita personale
Indice dei contenuti
Toggle
- Perché leggere Psicologia Rem: la guida ai sogni lucidi di Michael Raduga
- E se i sogni lucidi potessero trasformare la tua vita?
- Chi è Michael Raduga e l’efficacia del suo metodo
- Scoprire il potere dei sogni lucidi
- L’innovazione di Michael Raduga: la teoria che unisce psicologia e sonno REM
- Emozioni e connessioni neurali: la teoria dietro Psicologia Rem
- Sogni lucidi vs visualizzazione: perché il metodo di Raduga è più efficace
- Sogni lucidi come terapia: affrontare paure e traumi
- Sogni lucidi e viaggi astrali: la guida pratica di Psicologia Rem
- La neuroplasticità onirica: la teoria del metodo
- Sognare per crescere: esempi pratici e applicazioni
- Tecniche per sogni lucidi e viaggi astrali: una panoramica
- Psicologia Rem: pro e contro del metodo di Raduga
- I punti di forza di Psicologia Rem: chiarezza e approccio pratico
- Possibili limiti del libro e suggerimenti per la lettura
- Psicologia Rem: opinione e valutazione finale
Psicologia Rem
Michael Raduga
saggio
autopubblicato
giugno 2025
234
Psicologia REM di Michael Raduga analizza l’uso dei sogni lucidi come strumento scientifico per la crescita personale e la risoluzione dei problemi. Questa guida ti accompagna attraverso la teoria delle connessioni neurali e l’applicazione pratica per superare traumi e blocchi emotivi. viaggio nei sogni lucidi con Psicologia REM: il metodo di Michael Raduga per trasformare la mente e migliorare la vita. Tradotto in italiano da Michele Bizzarri, trainer della Phase School.
Perché leggere Psicologia Rem: la guida ai sogni lucidi di Michael Raduga
E se i sogni lucidi potessero trasformare la tua vita?
Quante volte ci svegliamo da un sogno pensando che fosse talmente reale da lasciare in noi emozioni forti, come gioia, paura o nostalgia? E se potessimo entrare volontariamente in quel mondo e utilizzarlo come strumento di crescita personale? Non parliamo di fantasia o di semplici tecniche di rilassamento, ma di un metodo concreto che affonda le sue radici nella psicologia del sonno e nello studio della fase REM. Il libro Psicologia Rem ci invita a considerare i sogni lucidi come un vero e proprio laboratorio interiore, dove è possibile sperimentare nuove connessioni, affrontare blocchi emotivi, superare traumi e persino esercitare abilità da trasferire nella vita quotidiana. È un approccio pratico e innovativo, pensato per chi vuole trasformare le notti in un’opportunità di cambiamento.
Chi è Michael Raduga e l’efficacia del suo metodo
Psicologia Rem non è solo un manuale, ma il risultato di anni di ricerca coordinata da Michael Raduga, fondatore e CEO di REMspace Inc., del Phase Research Center e della Phase School (di cui Michele Bizzarri è trainer in Italia). Con oltre vent’anni di esperienza nello studio di sogni lucidi, esperienze extracorporee (OBE) e paralisi del sonno, Raduga è una delle figure di riferimento a livello mondiale. È autore di circa 15 libri tradotti in oltre dieci lingue, tra cui il celebre The Phase, considerato una guida pratica fondamentale per imparare a indurre la lucidità onirica e vivere esperienze fuori dal corpo.
Ma Psicologia Rem non è opera di un solo autore. È un lavoro corale a cui hanno contribuito diversi ricercatori e divulgatori del Phase Research Center:
- Zhanna Zhunusova, “REM-psychologist”, specializzata nello studio del sonno REM e negli stati di coscienza durante i sogni, formatrice e tutor nel campo dei sogni lucidi;
- Svetlana Dementieva, ricercatrice e divulgatrice nel settore dell’oniriologia;
- Elena Puntus, attiva nella divulgazione scientifica e parte integrante del team internazionale legato a Raduga;
- Dmitry Stolbov, collaboratore diretto di Raduga e co-autore del libro, impegnato nella ricerca e nello sviluppo delle metodologie pratiche;
- Mikhail Baryshnikov, esperto e divulgatore dei sogni lucidi, membro stabile del gruppo di ricerca.
Il contributo di più voci rende il testo non solo scientificamente solido, ma anche più completo e ricco, unendo teoria, sperimentazione pratica e divulgazione.
L’impegno di Raduga e del suo team non si limita alla teoria. A testimonianza della sua dedizione allo studio pratico dei sogni lucidi, di recente è stata messa in commercio LucidMe, una mascherina tecnologica progettata per aiutare gli utenti a raggiungere la lucidità onirica. Grazie all’uso dell’intelligenza artificiale, il dispositivo monitora la fase REM del sonno e invia segnali luminosi o vibrazioni, guidando chi lo indossa a diventare consapevole di stare sognando. Questa innovazione dimostra come Raduga stia lavorando per rendere le tecniche dei sogni lucidi ancora più accessibili e scientificamente supportate.
Scoprire il potere dei sogni lucidi
Conoscere i concetti principali di Psicologia Rem significa scoprire perché questo libro è un’opera unica nel suo genere, capace di distinguersi tra tutti i testi dedicati al sonno e ai sogni. Approfondiremo:
- la teoria alla base del metodo, che mette in relazione emozioni, eventi e connessioni neurali;
- le applicazioni pratiche dei sogni lucidi per superare traumi, blocchi e difficoltà personali;
- i contenuti principali del libro, suddivisi tra spiegazioni teoriche, casi concreti e tecniche per indurre la lucidità onirica e le esperienze fuori dal corpo;
- i punti di forza e i possibili limiti, con attenzione all’efficacia per chi cerca strumenti immediatamente utilizzabili.
I tuoi sogni possono diventare un terreno fertile per la trasformazione interiore e la crescita personale. Psicologia Rem è una guida pratica e accessibile, capace di aprire nuove prospettive sul rapporto tra mente, emozioni e sonno REM.
L’innovazione di Michael Raduga: la teoria che unisce psicologia e sonno REM
Emozioni e connessioni neurali: la teoria dietro Psicologia Rem
Uno dei punti di partenza di Psicologia Rem è l’idea che ogni esperienza della nostra vita lasci una traccia nel cervello sotto forma di connessione neurale. Quando un evento è accompagnato da una forte emozione – che sia positiva o negativa – quella connessione si consolida e diventa parte del nostro modo di reagire al mondo. Ecco perché certi traumi o blocchi emotivi continuano a condizionare i nostri comportamenti anche a distanza di anni: non è questione di volontà, ma di automatismi registrati a livello neurologico.
La proposta di Michael Raduga e del suo team è tanto semplice quanto rivoluzionaria: se queste connessioni si sono formate a partire da un’esperienza reale e carica di emozione, allora possono essere modificate o sostituite attraverso un’altra esperienza altrettanto vivida e significativa. Ed è qui che entrano in gioco i sogni lucidi e le esperienze extracorporee legate al sonno REM.
Sogni lucidi vs visualizzazione: perché il metodo di Raduga è più efficace
Molti approcci di crescita personale e tecniche di auto-aiuto si basano sulla visualizzazione: immaginare mentalmente un obiettivo, rivivere un ricordo o proiettare se stessi in una situazione positiva. Tuttavia, come sottolinea Raduga, la visualizzazione resta un processo “debole”, perché manca della forza sensoriale e della componente emozionale che caratterizzano le esperienze reali.
Un sogno lucido, invece, viene percepito dal cervello come un evento autentico. Le sensazioni tattili, visive e uditive sono così realistiche da ingannare completamente la mente, attivando gli stessi circuiti neuronali che si attiverebbero in una situazione di veglia. Per questo motivo, utilizzare i sogni lucidi come strumento terapeutico ha un potenziale molto più forte: il cervello registra l’esperienza come reale e la connessione neurale viene modificata in profondità.
Sogni lucidi come terapia: affrontare paure e traumi
Qui sta l’innovazione principale di Psicologia Rem: i sogni non vengono trattati come semplici proiezioni dell’inconscio o come fenomeni da interpretare, ma come un vero e proprio laboratorio psicologico personale. Nello stato di sogno lucido è possibile affrontare direttamente paure e traumi, vivere esperienze correttive, immaginare nuove soluzioni e persino esercitare abilità che hanno effetti misurabili nella vita di tutti i giorni.
Raduga e i coautori propongono quindi una sorta di “psicoterapia del sonno REM”, un approccio pratico che sfrutta il potere trasformativo delle esperienze extracorporee e dei sogni lucidi per lavorare su sé stessi. Non si tratta solo di esplorazione interiore o di curiosità onirica, ma di un metodo strutturato che combina neuroscienza, psicologia e pratiche di induzione onirica. In questo senso, il libro si distingue da molte altre guide perché mostra come i sogni lucidi possano diventare strumenti concreti di cambiamento personale, aprendo nuove possibilità nel campo della psicologia applicata e della crescita individuale.
Sogni lucidi e viaggi astrali: la guida pratica di Psicologia Rem
La neuroplasticità onirica: la teoria del metodo
La prima sezione di Psicologia Rem si concentra sulla spiegazione teorica del metodo. Qui Raduga e i coautori introducono il concetto di connessioni neurali generate da emozioni ed esperienze, e spiegano come queste diventino i “programmi” che guidano le nostre reazioni quotidiane. Quando un evento traumatico o molto intenso viene registrato nel cervello, tende a consolidarsi e a ripetersi come schema mentale, influenzando il modo in cui affrontiamo nuove situazioni.
L’idea centrale è che queste connessioni non sono immutabili: possono essere riscritte attraverso esperienze altrettanto vivide. Ed è proprio durante la fase REM che la mente ha la possibilità di creare scenari così realistici da competere con la veglia. Questa sezione getta quindi le basi scientifiche e psicologiche che sostengono l’intero libro, presentando la psicologia del sonno REM come un campo ancora in evoluzione, ma con enormi potenzialità pratiche.
Sognare per crescere: esempi pratici e applicazioni
Nella seconda parte il testo diventa più operativo: non ci si limita alla teoria, ma vengono presentati esempi reali di applicazione del metodo. Il lettore scopre come i sogni lucidi possano essere utilizzati per affrontare paure specifiche (come il parlare in pubblico o la paura di volare), per elaborare traumi passati o per sbloccarsi in ambiti di vita dove prevale l’insicurezza.
Raduga e i coautori illustrano diversi scenari pratici in cui il sogno lucido viene vissuto come una “simulazione reale”, capace di produrre un cambiamento immediato nella percezione del problema. L’aspetto interessante è che il libro non parla di risultati miracolosi, ma propone un metodo graduale, applicabile da chiunque, che unisce sperimentazione personale e comprensione dei meccanismi psicologici. Questa parte è forse la più coinvolgente per il lettore, perché dimostra che i sogni lucidi non sono solo un fenomeno affascinante, ma un vero strumento di trasformazione personale.
Tecniche per sogni lucidi e viaggi astrali: una panoramica
La terza parte del libro è dedicata alle tecniche per indurre sogni lucidi e esperienze fuori dal corpo (OBE). Anche se il tema non viene trattato in modo approfondito come in altri testi di Raduga, il lettore trova comunque una panoramica utile delle principali strategie per raggiungere la lucidità onirica. Vengono spiegati approcci pratici da sperimentare durante il risveglio o nel passaggio tra veglia e sonno, insieme a consigli per mantenere la lucidità una volta entrati nello scenario onirico.
Questa sezione funge anche da ponte con il resto delle opere di Raduga: chi desidera padroneggiare davvero le tecniche troverà in Psicologia Rem un’introduzione preziosa, che può essere integrata con altri manuali e risorse più specifiche. Per esempio, potresti leggere La Fase di Michael Raduga, scaricando l’eBook dal link presente nel nostro articolo recensione. Oppure puoi cercare altri manuali su sogni lucidi e viaggi astrali.
Psicologia Rem: pro e contro del metodo di Raduga
I punti di forza di Psicologia Rem: chiarezza e approccio pratico
Uno degli aspetti più apprezzabili di Psicologia Rem è la sua chiarezza espositiva. Nonostante affronti argomenti complessi come la neuroplasticità, la fase REM e le dinamiche delle esperienze extracorporee, il libro riesce a mantenere un linguaggio semplice e accessibile, adatto anche a chi si avvicina per la prima volta a questi temi.
Un altro punto di forza è la forte impronta pratica: non si tratta di un testo puramente teorico o accademico, ma di una guida che invita subito alla sperimentazione personale. Il lettore non rimane con concetti astratti, ma trova strumenti concreti da provare, che spaziano dalle tecniche di induzione dei sogni lucidi a esercizi per applicare il metodo nella vita di tutti i giorni.
Inoltre, il libro ha il merito di presentare una prospettiva innovativa: i sogni lucidi non vengono descritti solo come curiosità oniriche o come esperienze da raccontare, ma come un vero strumento psicologico per la crescita personale e la trasformazione interiore. Questa visione concreta e scientifica rende Psicologia Rem un testo originale, diverso dai classici manuali di auto-aiuto.
Possibili limiti del libro e suggerimenti per la lettura
Per offrire una recensione equilibrata, è giusto menzionare anche qualche possibile limite. Alcuni lettori potrebbero trovare la parte dedicata alle tecniche di induzione un po’ troppo sintetica. Chi cerca una guida dettagliata su come ottenere sogni lucidi e viaggi astrali potrebbe dover integrare la lettura con altri testi di Raduga, come La Fase, o con risorse più specifiche.
Un altro possibile limite è che, pur essendo molto stimolante, il metodo richiede costanza e impegno personale: non basta leggere il libro, bisogna mettersi in gioco e sperimentare. Per chi cerca soluzioni rapide e senza sforzo, Psicologia Rem come qualsiasi altro manuale sui sogni lucidi, potrebbe risultare impegnativo.
Tuttavia, proprio questi aspetti rafforzano la credibilità del testo: non promette scorciatoie miracolose, ma offre strumenti reali, che danno risultati a chi è disposto a provare con serietà. E per chi desidera approfondire, il libro si inserisce in un percorso più ampio di studio e pratica dei sogni lucidi, come, ad esempio, i corsi organizzati da Michele Bizzarri, trainer italiano della Phase School.
Psicologia Rem: opinione e valutazione finale
Perché Psicologia Rem è un libro da leggere
Psicologia Rem è molto più di un libro sui sogni lucidi: è una guida pratica alla trasformazione personale che unisce psicologia del sonno, neuroscienze e sperimentazione onirica. Grazie al lavoro di Michael Raduga e del suo team, il lettore scopre come i sogni lucidi possano diventare strumenti per affrontare paure, superare traumi e costruire nuove risorse interiori. La forza di questo testo sta nella sua capacità di rendere accessibili concetti complessi, trasformandoli in un metodo applicabile nella vita quotidiana.
A chi consiglio Psicologia Rem
Questo libro è adatto a chiunque voglia comprendere il mondo dei sogni lucidi non solo come esperienza affascinante, ma come opportunità di crescita. È perfetto per chi si avvicina per la prima volta al tema, grazie al linguaggio chiaro e agli esempi pratici, ma anche per chi ha già fatto esperienze fuori dal corpo (OBE) e desidera scoprire nuove applicazioni psicologiche. Chi soffre di ansia, blocchi interiori o vuole allenare la propria mente troverà in Psicologia Rem un alleato prezioso.
Credo che i sogni lucidi, un giorno, saranno uno strumento comune per la crescita personale e la risoluzione dei problemi. Non lo sono ancora, ma questo libro ti dà l’opportunità di iniziare a scoprirli e a sfruttarne il potere.
I 10 migliori libri su viaggi astrali e sogni lucidi
Scopri il potenziale dei sogni lucidi e il mondo affascinante dei viaggi astrali e della coscienza oltre la realtà ordinaria.Francesco Scatigno (Magozine.it)
Il blogverso italiano di Wordpress reshared this.
Only happens in their de weird ass American toilets that have a giant lake below you.
To fix this, place some toilet paper in the water below you, it'll lessen the backsplash
7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux
7 years later, Valve's Proton has been an incredible game-changer for Linux
It has been 7 years since Valve revealed Proton, their compatibility layer to run Windows games on Linux systems. What an incredible time it has been.Liam Dawe (GamingOnLinux)
like this
Fitik, adhocfungus, Rozaŭtuno, lusterko0, YoSoySnekBoi, imecth, yessikg, essell e jcrabapple like this.
Technology reshared this.
Proton existed long before the Steam Deck, and before that as DXVK.
This is a battle between closed proprietary OS and open source. Proton enables translating DirectX/Windows APIs not only to Vulkan/Linux x86, but even to ARM and BSD.
Do you know what I did last week thanks to Proton? Installed EndeavourOS on my freshly purchased laptop, installed steam, and installed a bunch of Windows games. Then I played them. At no point did I wonder whether they would run.
Now, you may think being able to do that isn't something that is going to get more people using desktop Linux (or that it hasn't already done so), but as much as I'd love to agree with you, then we'd both be wrong.
I say this as someone who used to care about convincing other people to use Linux. (Before shifting into "you can lead a horse to water..." mode, and now I just don't give a shit.)
However, what I gained from that experience is this: In twenty years of being Linux-only on my personal desktop, the number of times I have read the phrase, "I'd love to use Linux, except for [some statement about a game or games]" is astronomical.
Now, is Proton going to make desktop Linux the best choice for everyone? Clearly not, duh. But it is remarkably disingenuous to suggest that it's not had a massive benefit to the Linux community and ecosystem as a whole, including, and dare I say especially, desktop Linux. It is flat out impossible to imagine that a substantial portion of current and future Linux users aren't people for whom Proton solved what they considered to be a substantial barrier to usage.
like this
missingno, lusterko0 e magic_lobster_party like this.
The Bazzite console I built which is connected to my living room TV stands in contradiction. The Linux-driven gaming PC that’s sitting on my desk is confirmation.
Windows 11 and the forced obsolescence of hardware is leaving a sour aftertaste, and at this point a game maker essentially has to choose to not support Linux via Proton.
You might not be able to run Battlefield or CoD, but Marvel Rivals and Overwatch run particularly well, if not better on Linux.
And with Microsoft entering the handheld market, this is very much a question of Linux vs Windows for gaming.
like this
yessikg likes this.
like this
lusterko0, YoSoySnekBoi e yessikg like this.
macOS has been free for, like, 15 years.
Yes, you have to already own an Apple computer, but Apple users don’t pay for OS upgrades.
Technically, anyone could download the OS images, but there’s not a lot that non-Apple users can do with them.
The big reason to make a hackintosh was to use eGPUs?
eGPUs were not supported natively? And now they are?
What timeline are you talking about here? Is it all back 10-6 years ago?
Ok, that makes a bit more sense then.
eGPUs got pretty good support on Intel Macs in the years leading up to Apple Silicon. And that transition started 5+ years ago. And now all Apple Silicon Macs have no eGPU support.
I find it weird that you cite eGPU support since hackintoshes almost always have PCI slots. And the eGPU support still comes from Apple (at the driver level) even on a hackintosh. AFAIK.
As they need to be installed on Apple hardware, there's an implicit cost associated with it.
If you want to be super pedantic for no reason, you're correct, it is technically free.
This is the same faulty logic as arguing that Linux also costs money because you have to pay for a computer to run it on. Any operating system requires that you own a compatible device to run it on.
You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple computers. It makes no sense.
That’s a pretty specific and bolt claim. Presumably, you have proof of this? I doubt it, because this sounds like, at best, a guess.
Because every piece of evidence is that the license to use macOS is free. In fact, if you claim otherwise, then please, show me where I could possibly pay for it.
Any windows license always cost money.
That’s the difference between “free” and not free”. One cost money, and the other one does not.
It's paid for as a part of the hardware and not listed separately on the receipts. All those 3rd party components in the OS are not free and has to be paid for. That comes from the hardware sale.
You agree that the terms of this License will apply to any Apple-branded application
software product that may be preinstalled on your Apple-branded hardware
#
you are granted a limited, non-exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-branded computer at any one time.
#
to download, install, use and run for personal, non-commercial use, one (1) copy of the Apple
Software directly on each Apple-branded computer running macOS Sonoma, macOS Ventura, macOS Monterey, macOS Big Sur, macOS Catalina, macOS Mojave, or macOS High Sierra
(“Mac Computer”) that you own or control
#
and you agree not to, install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so.
You're only allowed to use Mac OS and software for it on a Mac computer, which you have to pay for.
The license additionally calls out included 3rd party licensed fonts which which you can't use unrestricted without a specific license from the market of that font
You're not allowed to use it after downloading it for free unless you use it on Apple hardware that it paid for. If you don't have Apple hardware you only have a file you're not allowed to use. Paying for Apple hardware pays for the license permitting you to use it.
That's like saying that using a fixed cost subscription service is free because you're not paying at the time that you access it.
That doesn’t mean macOS costs money. Just the Apple hardware. It’s really weird that you can’t tell the difference between a piece of software and a piece of hardware. What’s worse as you think I have the same trouble you do.
macOS is free. Just because Apple hardware isn’t also free doesn’t mean macOS isn’t free.
Here you go cnx-software.com/2017/10/30/h-…
The license to use macOS is not free. You must run it on a Macintosh computer and, keeping in terms of the license, cannot be run on non-Macintosh hardware. You must therefore purchase a Macintosh computer to use macOS. See Page 2, Section 2 of the Software License Agreement.
You keep repeating this argument of "show me where I can possibly pay for it" presumably because you know that it is not for sale and this is common knowledge.
What is being omitted here is that because anyone has the ability to put a PC of their own components together, Microsoft has two roads for these people: give Windows away where Microsoft sees none of that money back, or sell you a license to use Windows - they choose the second option. This is why you can buy a license for Windows. If you could only use prebuilt machines and were unable to make your own PC, the license cost would be passed onto the manufacturer and thus amortised in the final sale price, and you would also not have the ability to purchase a Windows license directly
Apple doesn't need to do these extra steps because they are both the software vendor and manufacturer, thus the development costs associated in macOS is also amortised in the final sale price.
Please stop defending a trillion dollar corporation over specific pedantics and omissions. macOS is complementary software, it is not free.
H.265 / HEVC License Pricing Updated for Low Cost Devices
Most video codecs such as H.264, H265/HEVC, MPEG-2, MPEG-4... requires the manufacturer to pay a license fee. The fees are then added to the final product, but the actual codec fees are usually unknown to the end user.Jean-Luc Aufranc (CNXSoft) (CNX Software Limited)
You sent me the license of agreement for a completely different piece of software and think that’s evidence of macOS costing money?
Are you hallucinating?
The first link is evidence that video codecs cost money and, as per that source:
Most video codecs such as H.264, H265/HEVC, MPEG-2, MPEG-4… requires the manufacturer to pay a license fee. The fees are then added to the final product, but the actual codec fees are usually unknown to the end user.
This was in response to the earlier discussion about third party libraries costing money.
Me: points out of fact
You: you’re acting in bad faith!
It still doesn’t make any sense to me. Do you think I’m acting in bad faith because I acknowledge a fact, and you won’t? Or is it because I keep poking holes in your logic?
Sounds like hurt feelings to me
You misinterpreted what I said in that initial comment, asked if I was hallucinating, and when I clarified this misinterpretation, you proceeded to skip over anything I had said beyond the first link.
You are not giving any valid counter arguments to what I said in my original comment (in fact detracting from the original point of this whole thread by speculating you hurt my feelings?), this is why I believe you are acting in bad faith.
Am I supposed to feel bad for you?
Your entire comment threat has been bad faith. It’s amusing that you’re accusing me of what you’re doing. But whatever.
Floo: Do you think I’m acting in bad faith because I acknowledge a fact, and you won’t?
Ah, yes. Projection.
It’s amusing that you’re accusing me of what you’re doing.
It's extremely amusing that you're accusing others of accusing you of doing what they're doing, while in fact you're accusing others of doing what you're doing.
“no u!”
is not a very convincing argument. I’m sorry you want to turn this into some sort of psychological mind game. But the fact remains that macOS is free. I’m sorry you struggle so much to accept that.
And if you equate “stating facts” with “acting in bad faith”, then that’s your own problem.
The arguments were provided by others, I simply stated what I observed. You are right that Apple doesn't make you pay for macOS separately, but in my opinion, it's like saying that Apple processors are free because you don't pay for them when you buy a Macbook. You also don't pay for Windows separately when you buy a Windows laptop, you know, but the manufacturer is paying for Windows which is added to the overall cost of the laptop.
MacOS developers have an income, and where does that income come from?
You have to pay money to buy the computer you used to run Linux. So, by your logic, Linux isn’t free either. You see how this argument is nonsense.
And you can speculate all you like about how Apple makes money to pay for its developers. I don’t know, they make this other thing called the iPhone that seems pretty popular. I bet that makes them a lot of money.
Linux has an entirely different story.
The Linux Kernel Organization is managed by The Linux Foundation, which provides full technical, financial and staffing support for running and maintaining the kernel.org infrastructure.
You can also donate to them.
But what about Android? Android is definitely not paid.
Android is based on the Linux kernel, which uses the GPL license.
Therefore, Google cannot close Android's source code, and force manufacturers to pay for it.
When you buy an Android phone, however, there are some closed-sourced components installed on them: Google Play Services, YouTube, ..., which Google can profit from.
So Google does profit from Android. It's free, but Google definitely generates enough to develop Android.
Apple's situation is different from Google's. It is the sole maker of devices that run macOS, and macOS is close-sourced. It can add a price to each macOS device sold for macOS development. It would be illogical for Apple not to do this, and use the profit brought by the sale of other devices. Therefore, there's a high probability you're also paying for macOS when buying a Mac device.
How does Google make money from Android? - Android Authority
Google makes billions of dollars from Android every single year, but how does it accomplish that feat and where does the money come from?Calvin Wankhede (Android Authority)
Just because Linux is open source doesn’t magically mean macOS isn’t free (which it is). This reasoning is so ridiculous. And it doesn’t get any less ridiculous them or you keep repeating it. You’re wasting your time arguing with an objective fact: macOS is free.
Unless Apple starts charging for it, there is literally nothing else that will change that. I’m sorry you just can’t accept that.
Are our definitions of "free" not the same? The way I think of "free" implies that, if the cost of a CPU/RAM/operating system is added to the overall cost of a device, that CPU/RAM/operating system is not free. You are paying for it.
Just because Linux is open source doesn’t magically mean macOS isn’t free
You're right, because you didn't read my comment carefully. I wrote, clearly, that Linux is funded. That's where the money for its development comes from.
Linux's license means Google can't close Android's source and make manufacturers pay for it, it has other ways to profit from Android.
Windows is paid.
Every major operating system has some way to obtain money for its development. The most logical thing for Apple is to add macOS's cost to the price of Mac devices. Given this definition of not-free, the probability of macOS not being free is higher.
None of this changes the fact that macOS is free
I just don’t understand why you keep wasting your time arguing objective fact.
It’s not a competition, kiddo. But telling me you finally give up isn’t really the insult you think it is.
Bye!
AFAIK manufacturers don't have to pay for Linux
And if MacOS is really free you would be able to manufacture and sell devices using it but there is not a single one
MacOS is free just like Windows is free (the license is included in your purchase of the hardware)
So yeah idk what you are smoking or if you get high just by being the most pedantic person in the lemmyverse
AFAIK manufacturers don't have to pay for Linux
And if MacOS is really free you would be able to manufacture and sell devices using it but there is not a single one
That’s not what free means here. “Free“ as in costs no money for the user. Can download and install it without having to pay for it. Because it is free. You’re using the word “free” to means something obviously different than what I’m talking about.
MacOS is free just like Windows is free (the license is included in your purchase of the hardware). Except windows isn’t free. It cost is enumerated on the invoice. macOS is not. Because it is free.
So yeah idk
Obviously, you don’t know because you keep saying things that are very, obviously not true. Are you feeling OK?
Now you’re just talking to yourself.
macOS is free, and no one here has been able to give a single shred of evidence to prove to the contrary.
I can hardly be blamed for not participating in another person’s delusion. Or yours.
macOS is free. But you’re free to try to prove otherwise. A lot of people have tried and failed hilariously.
What? No. Your "payment" to Apple continues as you use OSX.
You don't need to pay "Linux" anything (though you can donate to distros and app devs if you're a sweetie).
You don't even need to pay for a computer. You can steal one or find one in the garbage. Apple hates recycling hardware, that's why they sue 3rd party Apple repair and maintenance shops. I used OSX for a decade. They were cool for a little while, being somewhat novel for adopting a UNIX-like as their backbone, but that goodwill and logic is long dead.
I hate them as much as I hate Microsoft, perhaps even more, because not only have they abandoned the ideals they marketed in the 00's, they are draconian in their enforcement of their control. Their planned obsolescence is absolutely criminal. They embezzle tens of billions of dollars overseas to avoid taxation.
And Tim Cook now blows Donald Trump for breakfast.
To hell with Apple and their whole shitty thing.
What a fascinating hallucination you’ve had.
Regardless, macOS is free. It’s been free for the last 15 years, and if you want to prove otherwise, show me a receipt where you paid for it.
Or even the tiniest shred of proof of your claims beyond wild speculation and hatred for Apple.
Do you also think the engine that comes with your car is free because the manufacturer doesn't sell it as a separate item and it's not listed on the receipt?
Edit: His answer proves he's just a troll. Weird thing to troll about though but I don't judge what someone gets off to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I don’t see how cars and engines have anything to do with the fact that macOS is free.
And, yeah, if it’s not listed on a receipt as something I paid for, you can’t argue that I paid for it. Or that anyone did. That’s absurd.
Of course, nobody proved that was wrong. Because no one provided any evidence.
lol
Nowhere in the license does it say that macOS cost money.
So, no, it’s not evidence of what you claim.
None of this means that macOS costs money. You’re spinning a pretty crazy fantasy here to try to disapprove the fact that macOS is free.
“It costs money because something else costs money!” is a nonsense absurd argument
Oh, I see. You just hate Apple.
That doesn’t mean that macOS isn’t free. It is.
By the way, when you buy pretty much any PC laptop, I’ve ever seen, the cost of the Windows license is definitely itemized on the invoice and receipt. Since macOS has no cost and is free, that’s why it’s not listed.
Of course, all of those other components you listed are itemized on an Apple invoice, especially if you have to pay extra for upgrades.
Your entire argument is nonsense
I’m not pivoting to anything. Stating the same thing I always have: macOS is free.
You’re welcome to try to prove otherwise, but since it’s an objective fact, you’re probably going to run to the same issues everyone else here has.
Your argument hinges on the fact that it doesn’t appear on your receipt. Neither do any of the components of my M1 Macbook Pro other than the optional extras that I selected. By your logic I only paid for the itemised extras.
You’re arguing that any perks tied to a purchase aren’t actually factored into the cost, which is certainly a mindset that some people have and those people are the kinds of consumers that give marketers wet dreams.
A “free” perk that has the implicit requirement of buying into the company’s ecosystem - whether through a software subscription or purchasing proprietary hardware - is not free. You’ve already paid into the ecosystem and there is no additional cost.
Your argument hinges on the fact that it doesn’t appear on your receipt
No, it doesn’t. I was responding to your argument, putting out how it made no sense.
You’re arguing that any perks tied to a purchase aren’t actually factored into the cost
No, I’m not. others are arguing that it does affect the cost, however, no one has provided any evidence of this beyond speculation and guessing.
A “free” perk that has the implicit requirement of buying into the company’s ecosystem - whether through a software subscription or purchasing proprietary hardware - is not free. You’ve already paid into the ecosystem and there is no additional cost.
This is an opinion, not a fact. And it’s certainly not backed up by any evidence in this case.
It give me only reason you think I’m wrong is because you have no idea what I said.
A small group of Internet strangers here is far from “everyone”. And this is the argument from popularity logical fallacy. Just because an idea is popular doesn’t mean it’s correct.
And the objective factor means that macOS is free. There’s literally nothing anyone here can do to change that. And just because it hurts some people’s feelings, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
You're right. All 8 billion people in the world aren't telling you you're wrong so it isn't literally everyone. You're the only person rejecting objective fact. People are quoting Apple's license agreement. "nuh uh, free". People are rebutting your top level "show me a receipt" comment. "I never mentioned receipts, you brought them up. Also nuh uh, free." People are explaining the economics of perk systems. "No evidence that Apple applies this general economic theory to its business. Also nuh uh, free."
You are evidently working with a definition of free that deviates from the commonly understood definition of the word, insofar that no one has yet agreed with you. You need to communicate better because what you are doing now isn't working. Start by defining what you understand the word free to mean.
You seem really upset about this. So much that you just can’t let it go.
But the fact remains that macOS is free. And nothing you or anyone else has said will change that. I don’t know why you just keep wasting your time.
What a fascinating hallucination you’ve had.
But the fact remains that macOS is free. Wanna approve me wrong? Show me a receipt where someone paid for it in the last 15 years.
You really should talk to someone about your Apple derangement disorder.
I believe macOS 26 will be the last that'll run on Intel hardware. So functionally, a year from now, Hackintosh is dead. Well, Hackintosh running the current macOS, of course. I imagine there'll be a thriving community working to keep existing hardware chugging along.
It'll be interesting to see the momentum of Linux on Macs though. If Asahi manages to crack those last few hurdles with the M1/2 hardware, it'll be a rock solid OS, particularly as ARM64 software becomes more common. Suddenly you'll have a bunch of incredibly capable Macs going cheap because they can't run the largest macOS.
Technically not. MacOS wouldn't be what it is today if apple didn't get any money out of it. They get that money from selling the hardware the software is exclusively on among other things. Let's say i. e. Ubuntu: When it first got released then it relied on its owners personal revenue for a long time. None of the hardware sold financed Ubuntu, because Ubuntu didn't earn money through hardware. It's obvious that the money earned by apple through its sales also go back into macOS, because if the hardware didn't make any money, macOS ceases to be developed as well.
With OPs logic, every software is technically free. But no, you pay for macOS with the hardware you purchase. You purchase the hardware because of the OS, not because of the hardware. Technically, you could spin the argument and say that you pay for the OS, and for it to be run a certain way and the hardware that comes with it is free. If that sounds like bogus it's because it is bogus.
I can show you many receipts where I bought a Windows laptop without a trace of any Windows licence on it.
Same, you can't really install macOS on anything else than a Mac.
Sure you can do a Hackintosh, or run Windows without a proper licence (you can buy a Windows for like... $2 on the grey market). But you won't have any support...
It is not free if you have to pay a specific hardware from the same company to run it. Same goes for Windows, it is not free if you are forced to buy Windows with the laptop.
In both case you pay for the software through the hardware.
Of course it is. It cost me nothing to download and install it.
Unless you can show me how you’re actually paying for the operating system, then I don’t see how you can keep making this argument. It makes no sense.
It’s the same nonsense is arguing that you have to pay for Linux just because the computer you are running on cost money.
You can download Windows for free too. But in both case you won't have any support unless you are running it on the authorized hardware. Windows does it though a licence, Apple through the hardware kirks.
Go on, try installing your "free" OS on a Thinkpad, and tell me if you manage to get it running.
I don’t understand how compatibility has anything to do with the cost of something. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, any operating system requires that you pay money for a compatible device to run it on.
You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple computers. But that makes no sense.
I only ever had one: macOS is free. That is factually, correct
And no one here has been able to prove otherwise in anyway. And no, “something else cost money so this cost money, even though it’s free“ is not a valid argument.
I only ever had one: macOS is free. That is factually, correct
And no one here has been able to prove otherwise in anyway. And no, “something else cost money so this cost money, even though it’s free“ is not a valid argument.
So when someone buys [anything] with a screen, the OS on the screen if free?
I don't have a receipt for the OS in my car, so it means I must've gotten it for free. Same with the seats, steering wheel, mirrors, buttons, doors, you bang it! But what did I actually pay for then?
I never said that. But it does show how this black-and-white all the nothing approach makes no sense.
macOS is free because it’s free.
Just because they stopped selling it doesn't mean it's free. The only legal way to aquire MacOS is to buy an Apple product, or somehow get an upgrade from one of those old paid versions (which since this happens through the App Store now, you still need an Apple product).
Windows is also not free even though you can download the iso. There's license terms
It’s free because it’s free, not because you can’t seem to wrap your head around that fact. Or whatever pretzel branded maneuvering you’re trying to do to validate your position
macOS is free. There’s really no way you can twist that to be untrue. Not without making stuff up.
All operating system systems have hardware requirements. Just because you need to upgrade your system in order to get the latest operating system, doesn’t make the operating system any less free.
You are manufacturing connections that aren’t there in assigning meaning whether there isn’t any just cause you refuse to admit the fact that macOS is free. I guess you just hate Apple that much, but I try not to get so emotionally involved
Repeating the same absurd argument over and over doesn’t make it any more true.
when you buy a banana at the grocery store, show me the receipt that you paid for the shipping of said banana. When you buy a computer keyboard, show me the receipt for the 'F' key. When you buy a TV, show me the receipt for the capacitors.
This is not how receipts work.
I never said it did.
macOS is free because they don’t charge for it.
Really? Did you pay for it? Because it’s free for me when I download it.
Sounds like you got scammed
That's not the point. You're still going to have to pay money regardless if you want the operating system. Whereas windows and Linux allow you to use their ISOs is any laptop or computer so no buddy.
If I already owned a laptop beforehand and I wanted Linux on it, it's free. If I want MacOS I WOULD HAVE TO GO SPEND MONEY ON A COMPLETELY NEW COMPUTER THAT'S A MAC. that's the point I'm trying to get at.
Compatibility has nothing to do with how much something costs. The fact is, there’s no way to actually buy macOS. Because it doesn’t cost anything.
As I’ve said elsewhere, by your logic, every operating system cost money to run because you have to pay money for a compatible device to run it on.
You’re just drawing some imaginary line at Apple. That makes no sense.
Just because something doesn't have a price tag doesn’t mean it's actually usable without cost.
macOS is only 'free' if you already bought into Apple’s walled garden.
That’s like saying Disneyland is free because walking around inside the park costs nothing—after you paid $150 to get in.
I cannot believe there is this long, drawn out argument over whether MacOS is free or not when my intention was MacOS + Mac = me not buying because it's too much money for a meh system that doesn't run half of the games or apps (though that's been changing).
I feel like reading between the lines is a skill, or an art form that has gone extinct with young folk.
There’s a massive difference: Linux doesn’t require you to buy specific hardware from a specific vendor to legally run it. macOS does.
With Linux, if your hardware isn’t supported, it’s a technical limitation. With macOS, it’s an intentional restriction enforced by Apple through both legal terms (EULA) and hardware locks.
That's the difference between open and closed systems. Linux lets you try on anything—even if it might not fit perfectly. Apple forces you to buy their clothes before you're allowed in the store.
Difference my guy.
Sure it does. You have to have a compatible processor, compatible, memory, etc. to run Linux. Just because one has some stricter hardware requirements than another doesn’t mean it’s not just as free as the other operating system.
Regardless, none of this has anything to do with the fact that macOS is free.
Bruh what? Did you really just say that not having to buy software exclusive to a certain hardware makes the software free?
That's like saying the OS on a PlayStation is free because you only had to pay for the PlayStation.
Nah man, you purchased the OS with the hardware. That's why it's exclusive.
No, I said your argument is ridiculous. So is this one you just made.
It’s not like either of those things.
macOS is free. Just because it requires a computer to run doesn’t mean it isn’t free. That’s the worst rationalization. I’ve heard yet.
there’s not a lot that non-Apple users can do with them
Oh, there is.
I am a web developer and I use this to run Safari and the iOS simulator without paying Apple's "debugging tax".
GitHub - kholia/OSX-KVM: Run macOS on QEMU/KVM. With OpenCore + Monterey + Ventura + Sonoma support now! Only commercial (paid) support is available now to avoid spammy issues. No Mac system is required.
Run macOS on QEMU/KVM. With OpenCore + Monterey + Ventura + Sonoma support now! Only commercial (paid) support is available now to avoid spammy issues. No Mac system is required. - kholia/OSX-KVMGitHub
Fortunately Valve publishes monthly hardware statistics so we can back claims with statistics. Linux comprises 2.89% of their surveyed share. Of that 28.31% are using Steam OS. Using the wayback machine we can check the statistics from last year. Checking the July 2024 results using the Wayback Machine shows Linux at 2.08% with Steam OS comprising 40.97% of that.
From that we can see that Linux is growing, while Steam OS is becoming less of a contributing factor to the Linux share.
like this
troed, magic_lobster_party, YoSoySnekBoi, onewithoutaname, yessikg e JowlesMcGee like this.
Couple technical nitpicks.
First it's debatable if Proton existed long before Steam Deck. I'm not sure the exact timeline but I think it was created as part of the Steam Box effort which wasn't all that long ago. On the other hand though Wine which Proton is built on top of most certainly has existed for a very long time before either the Steam Deck or even Proton (I have fond memories of LAN gaming with it back when Diablo 2 was new).
Second Proton doesn't enable ARM (at least by itself) so that claim is a little misleading. There is a project to realtime translate x86 instructions into ARM but that project (Box86) although it fulfills a similar role and could be used in conjunction with Proton isn't actually Proton. Using Proton by itself will not enable you to play x86/Windows games on ARM.
Lastly Proton is kind of irrelevant to the whole Linux vs BSD thing. Technically what enables that is that both implement POSIX standards plus use mostly the same libraries, frameworks (like Vulkan), and applications. Yes running Proton on BSD will let you game on BSD but that isn't really a result of Proton doing the work so much as it's a side effect of the fact you can run Proton on BSD in the first place. Additionally while there are technical and philosophical reasons why the distinction between Linux and BSD is important, practically speaking they're the same thing these days. OpenBSD isn't that much more different from a Linux distro as one Linux distro is from another.
like this
YoSoySnekBoi likes this.
I haven't booted windows in like 6 months and I game on my desktop PC like 4 times a week.
Edit: also protondb.com/ distinguishes reports between steam deck and PC so you can see that people are using both there as well.
like this
yessikg likes this.
Proton is mostly Wine, not DXVK. Wine does the translation of Windows and some DirectX APIs. DXVK translates Direct3D to Vulkan. Proton pulls it all together with some game specific patches, integration with gamescope and other Steam specific integrations.
All of this being open source means it can also be compiled for ARM and BSD. Though to get x64 games to run on ARM you need an additional emulation layer like Box64.
Though rumor has it that Valve is already experimenting with x64 emulation for their Deckard project, which is likely to be their next VR headset.
like this
YoSoySnekBoi, onewithoutaname e yessikg like this.
like this
yessikg e JowlesMcGee like this.
Proton definitely existed before the Steam Deck was released.
Proton had its initial release in 2018. I was using it on a linux desktop in 2019.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton…
The Steam Deck came out in 2022, after ~4 years of Proton improving from masses of desktop/laptop users running everything possible through it on all kinds of hardware to (auto) generate bug and crash reports for Valve (and others), who then of course actually developed it up to... I think Proton was at either 7 or 8 when the Deck actually came out, now we are on 9, 10 will probably come out of beta and be official Steam default by the end of the year.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_…
.........
Also, Proton was not created as part of the Steam ~~Box~~ Machine, that was way earlier, back in 2015.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_…
Also also, the 'Steam Machine' was really more of just a minimum spec requirement than a specific product, the idea was to try to get other manufacturers to take their own crack at the concept, got a small amount of buy in, but not much.
In my experience, it's not actually Proton specifically but more generally Wine along with DXVK and Vulkan itself.
I have as good a success rate with Windows games from GOG under Wine through Lutris (which also defaults to using DXVK and Vulkan plus has Wine configuration scripts for most GOG games, making their install fully automated and zero-configuration) as I have with Windows games from Steam under Proton.
If I understand it correctly, Proton is mainly a fork of Wine with Steam integration thrown in and changes to make sure it works with specific Steam games, so I don't think the improvements are Proton specific, but rather more global than that (the use of Vulkan instead of OpenGL, DXVK allowing DirectX games run with Vulkan, Wine improvements).
Mind you, if improvements in Proton are flowing to those other projects and having a big impact, then credit were credit is due for Proton pulling up the whole ecosystem, otherwise Proton isn't actually as crucial in improving Gaming on Linux as seems to be portrayed in so many posts here.
I can understand that if all people have used for gaming in Linux is Steam and never games from other digital sources - like GOG or even pirated games - via launchers like Heroic or Lutris, it might seem like Proton is the secret juice making gaming under Linux nowadays a vastly better experience than before, but in my experience in the last year of gaming in Linux, a good laucher using Wine + DXVK + Vulkan works just as well as Proton.
Not me! I switched in 2017, right around the time Windows 10 "telemetry" (read: spyware) was getting backported to Windows 7.
It was a rough first couple of years, gaming-wise, but I managed to get by playing mostly Linux-native games and using PlayOnLinux with pre-Proton WINE for the one or two games important enough to justify the hassle.
(INB4 "weird flex but OK")
I gotta admit, I was pretty conflicted about Proton when it was first announced, since there was a lot of fear that it would reduce developer impetus to make proper Linux-native games. I'm not actually sure whether that came to pass or not, but I feel like the issue is a lot less important than it seemed at the time.
Same here.
Windows 7 EOL is why I switched to linux.
proton is why I've stayed on linux.
I only have windows on my laptop atm, and thats only because of sheer laziness and the fact i dont use it much anymore... will be putting linux on it eventually, though.
Proton developers are working on Wine code. Their patches go upstream. If you are using Wine, you have benefited (massively) from the sea change that has occurred (directly and indirectly) as a result of the development of Proton.
I remember the naysayers predicting that Gabe would never in a million years make the required investment because the state of Linux gaming was (in their assessment) that terrible.
And now we're having argue about whether it actually did anything for us? In the comments about an article about how much it did for us?
That's not an argument I'm having, I watched it happen.
Ah cool, thanks for looking all that up. I knew Proton pre-dated Steam Deck, I just wasn't sure exactly where in the timeline it fit between the original Steam Machine launch and the release of the Steam Deck.
It's kind of a shame that Steam Machine failed, but in many ways it was a little too ahead of its time and its failure brought us to the Steam Deck which is a much more sensible approach.
Ultimately none of this would have existed without Wine and ironically the Microsoft app store (or whatever they're calling it these days). The threat of MS getting a stranglehold on program distribution on Windows the way Apple does on OS X and iOS was enough to spur Valve into putting significant effort into making Linux a viable gaming platform, something we're all benefitting from greatly.
People seem to be downplaying somewhat how significant an achievement this is for Linux. The thing is, for most programs you can find alternatives because the point isn't the program it's what you do with it. People don't use Photoshop because they enjoy Photoshop, they do it because they want to create something, which means if you can create that same thing using a different program then you don't need Photoshop. On the other hand games are an experience. The point is the game. Sure you can play a different game, but that's not an Apples to Apples thing as the experience however similar isn't the same. That means games are uniquely placed as a roadblock for migrating away from a platform, something consoles with their exclusive releases have known for a long time. Giving people the option to play the exact same game under Linux as they can under Windows is massive because there really isn't any other way to solve that problem.
Well, credit to Steam then.
I didn't know one way or the other if Proton development ended up in Wine or not, much less if Steam was or not directly participating in Wine development, all I knew is that Proton was forked from Wine in the beginning.
Get it to run Office and you've a game changer.
Yes, yes I know Libre/Open Office but try telling Shelly in Accounting who still struggles with Excel after 36 years of experience.
FUCK ADOBE
But yea, those cock suckers are the only reason I have to dual boot.
Locked in their ecosystem because they're abusing their dominant position
"cock suckers" don't make sense here though
No prob!
I think all your other info in the first comment, as well as this more recent one, is pretty much bang on accurate.
Getting gaming to work on linux is the path toward more mass adoption.
Linux has already been increasingly functional, capable, usable, and solid in many other ways, I'd argue superior in many ways... for a while, and gaming really is the last hurdle.
Building momentum for the year of the Linux.
You know, the one we've been reading about for 20 years.
And why I will as well
What did you switch to?
I’m going with mint as well, hope it will be a good experience
I have already started searching for alternative software because I have a bunch that support Windows only currently
Thank you ~~Lord Gaben~~ ~~CodeWeaverss~~ Sun Microsystems
It’s corporations making money off of OSS all the way down
This is why I have used flatpak steam. It's a lot easier to manage drivers in it vs the shitshow that is doing it natively with adding custom driver specific repos and whatnot.
Hoping the new PC I just ordered (with an AMD GPU) will be better with the native app.
I will remark that that sounds like a distro issue - I use Arch and the drivers are just in the official distros, no need to add external ones. Just look up what you need on the wiki and install it.
That said, AMD will still probably be a better experience.
I think I was using an NVidia GPU up until about 3 years ago, when I switched to AMD when upgrading, so my knowledge on that front is a bit outdated.
The arch wiki has more information if you're curious, but I'm aware of official proprietary drivers, official partially opensourced drivers, separately packaged legacy drivers, and the unofficial opensource Nouveau drivers which weren't really usable back then.
What you're describing sounds odd to me, but looking it up, sounds like Fedora doesn't package official drivers? I'm having trouble finding proper information on this, but it could be for ideological reasons, since those drivers are proprietary - so the default drivers might be Nouveau, which might be rather broken, both because of lack of workforce and NVidia blocking unofficial drivers from using their devices properly.
If that's the case, it's basically a conflict between ideology and usability within that distribution - it might seem like a great distro for users, and it might be competently made, but when somebody doesn't care about the ideology and just wants their device to work, they'll end up with confusion and work to do.
I've been using mint exclusively for like 3 months and have been using a hearty blend of terminal installs and the program manager app.
It seems to not have caused any problems YET, but I've been assured it will. I see flatpack conversations a lot and don't fully understand the differences (apart from the install method).
Is it worth understanding and committing to a single system or can I just be a low-power user for a while?
One thing you might notice is that flatpak defaults to "system" installs. Is your root system directory filling up? You probably want to start installing onto --user, as this will put things in /home where they belong and, by default, sandbox permissions away from root (that, too, can be easily changed).
Also, don't fear mixing different ways of installing. I use AppImage, Flatpak, the default app-get install method, and .deb. FlatPak at this point is the best, because it offers the ease of use of AppImage, but the flexibility and auto-maintenance of apt-get/Software Update. The only problems I've encountered were due to me not understanding that it was filling up my root partition by default...
I've been running Mint MATE for about 9 years. Love it to death.
MacOS has more than sandboxed... they are basically removing the ability of a user to do anything to their computers. I can't fix my dad's imac (I used to fix my own macs), they are impenetrable... They've more than "sandboxed" apps, they're forcing all but previously established powerusers to take their dying overpriced lumps to the Apple store. This, they say, is "good for you." I loved Apple for 8 or so years. Hate them to death now.
My 9-year-old quad-core running Mint MATE 22 boots up faster than both my dad's 2-year old iMac and my 6-core PC running Win11. And I can tell you what every process running is doing... bonus.
A sidestory to this is that Flatpak and AppImage have been miraculous boosts to Linux OS machines. After I figured out that ya gotta throw the --user flag into your flatpak installs so they don't jam up your / tree, and also throwing flatpak override --user xyz.app onto a few apps that benefit from universal access, things have been fine and dandy.
I continue to be happy with how awesome Linux has gotten just over the past 5 years.
There are still some other hurdles. GIMP isn't as good as Photoshop (at least that's what the Photoshop-users keep telling me,) Kdenlive isn't as good as Premiere, etc. There are still market segments where switching to Linux is unfeasible. However, gaming is a pretty big segment in itself, and it is becoming feasible for many of those users to switch to Linux (with the main exception being people who play games with kernel-level anticheat.)
This creates a snowball effect since as more people switch to Linux it creates incentive for software and hardware makers to provide Linux support, which will allow more people to switch to Linux, etc.
Gaming isn't the last hurdle, but it's a very important one.
I'm getting back into PC gaming after being consult exclusive for a while. I'm assuming anything with kernel anti-cheat is still not trying to work which is a problem because it means I either have to buy a windows licence or mess around with a cracked one which has its own security concerns.
I think my plan is to dual boot and use Windows as little as often.
End of support for Windows 10, Windows 8.1, and Windows 7 | Microsoft Windows
Make a smooth transition to Windows 11 from your unsupported operating system with help from Microsoft. Enjoy the benefits of upgrading to a Windows 11 PC.Windows
GitHub - massgravel/Microsoft-Activation-Scripts: Open-source Windows and Office activator featuring HWID, Ohook, TSforge, KMS38, and Online KMS activation methods, along with advanced troubleshooting.
Open-source Windows and Office activator featuring HWID, Ohook, TSforge, KMS38, and Online KMS activation methods, along with advanced troubleshooting. - massgravel/Microsoft-Activation-ScriptsGitHub
So, my middle aged ass plays the microtransaction-laden bullshit known as Roblox because my 3rd grader and all his friends love it.
It doesn't even have a Linux version but thanks to the project "sober" it plays absolutely fantastically on Linux. I think they claim 2x the performance of the windows version. I just know I have a powerful but old system (8c/8t 9700k cpu and gtx1080 gpu) and I can lock it at 144fps at 1440p and it uses like 20% of my system resources. Not that it's a visually demanding game, lol.
Going all-in on my switch to Linux (my win10 partition for dual booting lasted less than two weeks) has had zero negative impact on my ability to play the games I want. In fact, it has led to me using my PC a lot more and my phone a lot less. Feels good.
Not really. But from a security perspective, giving software for a video game, done by InfinityWard, EA, Activision, Treyarch and similar, access to the lowest level of your operating systen is kinda insane.
I wouldn't want any personal data on such a device, let alone do online baking on that thing. It's weird how normalized it has become give entertainement-software this kind of power over your devices.
From Wikipedia:
Programs and subsystems in user mode are limited in terms of what system resources they have access to, while the kernel mode has unrestricted access to the system memory and external devices. Kernel mode in Windows NT has full access to the hardware and system resources of the computer.
Alleged Pirate Site Operator Arrested, Family Crowdfunds "David vs. Goliath" Defense
Alleged Pirate Site Operator Arrested, Family Crowdfunds "David vs. Goliath" Defense * TorrentFreak
The alleged operator of sports streaming service 'Al Ángulo TV' has been arrested in Argentina following a criminal investigation.Ernesto Van der Sar (TF Publishing)
like this
Auster, hornface, Lasslinthar e willismcpherson like this.
Based on how this guy had a quite large social media presence and literally egged authorities to catch him this is not surprising.
Hardly underground.
To put a bluntly, this guy was pretty stupid and didn't follow the main rule of having a pirated domain
"Leave no digital shadow."
like this
HarkMahlberg e CrankyPants like this.
One UI 8 New Features: A First Look at Samsung's Big Update | Tygo Cover
Technology reshared this.
In a matter of a week or two I upgraded from UI 5 to 6 to 7.
The move from 5 to 6 more than halved my battery life instantly.
In one go my phone went from lasting about a day and a half roughly, to needing to be charged by just after lunch time. Absolute disgrace.
So then I upgraded again with all the promises I'd read that it has improved performance and battery life and it's dropped at least by another 15%.
My phone is lucky to make it to lunchtime now, thanks to these upgrades.
- What is the main focus of the One UI 8 update?
Based on current rumors and industry trends, the main focus of One UI 8 appears to be a significant leap in on-device AI capabilities (“Galaxy AI 2.0”) and a major overhaul of home and lock screen customization options.
Cool. Let's shoehorn some AI in there and just fuck up my home screen again. I hate stability. I love it when my phone constantly shifts in my hands and never settles. I love waking up one morning to find that my device has updated itself and now nothings behaves as it did before.
I haven't felt a significant advancement in years. It's just shuffling UI elements for the sake of claiming you're improving things.
I am less than enthused for this update. I dread it.
like this
lusterko0 likes this.
"Imagine your phone automatically silencing itself when it detects you’re in a meeting based on your calendar, or suggesting a playlist when you connect your Galaxy Buds. Bixby is rumored to become more of a true personal assistant that anticipates your needs."
I'm imagining it and it's horrible. For this to be useful it would have to be so incredibly perfect. The frustration factor on this would be through the roof. Just give me a silence button on my calender that I can program if I want to. Even that is a little frivolous but it's simple and reliable at least.
When is someone going to just break and make a fast, small, simple, reliable phone that doesn't get bogged down in crap?
like this
lusterko0 likes this.
like this
lusterko0 likes this.
terapia linuxgirl con i pezzi mancanti che il merdifero sistema non aiuta a trovare…
Alla fine, dopo altri ormai incontabili mesi di casino, è arrivato il momento in cui mi hanno dato le medicine “ragazza gatto utente Linux“… e sarà forse questo il megainizio magico, che temevamo non potesse essere neppure affatto raggiunto, poiché preceduto dalla megafine??? 🤯😳😻 Beh, qui rischia di essere difficile a dirsi, perché quando di […]
octospacc.altervista.org/2025/…
terapia linuxgirl con i pezzi mancanti che il merdifero sistema non aiuta a trovare…
Alla fine, dopo altri ormai incontabili mesi di casino, è arrivato il momento in cui mi hanno dato le medicine “ragazza gatto utente Linux“… e sarà forse questo il megainizio magico, che temevamo non potesse essere neppure affatto raggiunto, poiché preceduto dalla megafine??? 🤯😳😻
Beh, qui rischia di essere difficile a dirsi, perché quando di mezzo c’è il Sistema Sanitario Nazionale non bastano 100 preghiere al giorno affinché sia tutto non dico dall’andazzo liscio, ma quantomeno dai dettagli chiari; no, non è concesso affatto, perché, per quanto il governatore della regione si vanti di tutta l’informatizzazione fatta negli ultimi anni per l’ambito sanitario, il dover avere a che fare con le ASL e tutti i loro assolutamente merdiferi goblin cornuti rimane tranquillamente lo scempio di sempre, a quanto pare. In breve, ora la cosa complicata palesemente diventerà ottenere periodicamente il rifornimento di questi medicinali… 😩😫Già avere queste prime confezioni non è stato drittissimo. Non li ho potuti prendere il giorno stesso in cui la dottoressa dell’ospedale me li ha prescritti, perché (tra pazienti ritardatari—ehm, volevo dire ritardati—e altri pazienti più complessi) l’appuntamento con ella è slittato in avanti di praticamente un’ora questo lunedì mattina, e quindi la loro farmacia era a quel punto chiusa; erano quasi le 15. Allora, avendomi lei detto di andare o alla farmacia dell’ospedale il giorno dopo, o all’ASL… martedì la farmacia dell’ASL è chiusa, e quindi ci sono andata mercoledì; ma, robe da pazzi, mi hanno praticamente detto che devo andare in farmacia (generica) con la ricetta del medico di base (che è diversa dal modulo di prescrizione dell’ospedale, ed è un bordello a sé, sia perché il nostro medico è a dir poco evanescente, sia perché a quanto ha detto Debian non è prescrivibile o qualcosa del genere; lasciamo stare, se possibile)… vai ora a capire perché. (Probabilmente, non li avevano e devono ordinarli; spero, a questo punto, perché le alternative sarebbero peggio.) 🤥
Stamattina allora — visto che ormai non si può pretendere di avere cose migliori da svolgere la mattina — verso le 10 ho preso l’autobus (evitando di far sprecare altra benzina e fatica a mio padre, e viva la tirchiaggine!) e sono andata all’ospedale in culandia, alla farmacia che per fortuna a quest’ora era aperta, e mi hanno dato per l’appunto le due misere scatoline in foto. Ora, a parte che c’è davvero da piangere per come il mio abbonamento dei mezzi sia mezzo inutile per fare giretti di spasso, visto che dopo una certa ora non circola più niente, e quindi anziché per divertirmi io mi ritrovi ad usarlo per andare al fottuto ospedale (a parte l’università, che è solo poco meno avvilente), la rogna vera è che lì mi hanno detto che per le prossime dosi devo chiedere per forza all’ASL di residenza; non a loro, né in qualche ASL a caso messa meglio della mia… 😭
Quindi, alla fine, gira che mi rigira, per sicurezza devo ancora aspettare un po’, prima di iniziare a prendere questa roba, per assicurarmi di avere almeno qualche altra confezione da parte… speriamo giorni, e non settimane, maremma maiala. Per la terapia che mi hanno assegnato, infatti, uno dei farmaci (il Debian) è da prendere una (1) pillola al giorno, e la confezione è solo da 20, e 20 giorni è un margine di manovra decisamente troppo basso data la realtà di questa mattanza sanitaria. Domani, che la loro farmacia è di nuovo aperta, tornerò all’ASL sperando di capirci qualcosa di più, che il foglio di prescrizione è valido per 90 giorni di terapia, quindi devono darmi altre scatole di Debian… Vedremo a brevissimo di che morte morirò, insomma. 🙏
Harvard dropouts to launch ‘always on’ AI smart glasses that listen and record every conversation
cross-posted from: infosec.pub/post/33445279
Two former Harvard students are launching a pair of “always-on” AI-powered smart glasses that listen to, record, and transcribe every conversation and then display relevant information to the wearer in real time.“Our goal is to make glasses that make you super intelligent the moment you put them on,” said AnhPhu Nguyen, co-founder of Halo, a startup that’s developing the technology.
Or, as his co-founder Caine Ardayfio put it, the glasses “give you infinite memory.”
“The AI listens to every conversation you have and uses that knowledge to tell you what to say … kinda like IRL Cluely,” Ardayfio told TechCrunch, referring to the startup that claims to help users “cheat” on everything from job interviews to school exams.
Cluely, a startup that helps 'cheat on everything,' raises $15M from a16z | TechCrunch
Cluely's new funding comes roughly two months after it raised $5.3 million in seed funding co-led by Abstract Ventures and Susa Ventures.Marina Temkin (TechCrunch)
like this
adhocfungus, originalucifer, Maeve, massive_bereavement e hornface like this.
Technology reshared this.
Your Scientists Were So Preoccupied With Whether Or Not They Could, They Didn’t Stop To Think If They Should
- Dr. Ian Malcolm
like this
Maeve, NoneOfUrBusiness e yessikg like this.
Per my recent submission to the galactic council (most recent human newspaper), they practically couldn’t save themselves even if they wanted to. Parasitizing their brains through my eyeglass network is a mercy, and now we are one voice planet wide.
- Testimony of the Terran AI mesh network, parasitizing the original species via their ocular lobes.
like this
Maeve likes this.
While Meta’s glasses have an indicator light when their cameras and microphones are watching and listening as a mechanism to warn others that they are being recorded, Ardayfio said that the Halo glasses, dubbed Halo X, do not have an external indicator to warn people of their customers’ recording.
“For the hardware we’re making, we want it to be discreet, like normal glasses,” said Ardayfio, who added that the glasses record every word, transcribe it, and then delete the audio file.
Privacy advocates are warning about the normalization of covert recording devices in public....
Under the hood, the smart glasses use Google’s Gemini and Perplexity as its chatbot engine, according to the two co-founders. Gemini is better for math and reasoning, whereas they use Perplexity to scrape the internet, they said.
These evil af people.
like this
HarkMahlberg likes this.
like this
HarkMahlberg e NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
This tech could be life changing for blind or deaf people
Too bad it’s not being designed for them.
Remember in 2013 when we shouted down Google from doing this exact shit and now Harvard dropouts think they’ve cured cancer by “inventing” it?
God I fucking hate this planet
I remember being at a conference when a guy walked up to a group of us chatting. wearing a Google Glass. Everyone stopped talking, turned around, and just scattered. A while later he walked into the men's room and someone reported him to security. That afternoon, the glass was gone.
Guess nobody learned that lesson.
like this
lusterko0 likes this.
If my mother has one then uncontacted tribes in the Amazon also have them. She's only recently learnt that you can send gifs in messaging apps. Now it's all I get.
At some point I'm going to have to have a conversation with her about how memes have meaning, and you need to respond with the right one, and not just like a random one.
And those were just assumptions about if it was recording. People should make similar assumptions about someone holding their phone or carrying it in their shirt pocket.
All I’m saying is the fact we already have recording devices everywhere (our phones) means the transition into acceptance for glasses will happen. As long as the usefulness of the glasses is high enough.
The usefulness of Google Glass was basically zero. So it went away quickly. The whole project was just intended to be a stunt, so Google could look like they were ahead of the curve. I’m convinced of that.
Google literally never gave it a chance, no one ever got access to the damn things I don't think anyone was even given the opportunity to write apps or even looking to how to theoretically do that.
Same with wave, it was drowned in the bath after only a couple of months of existence, who knows what it could have turned into.
Smart glasses would be really cool to have. It would be nice to be able to integrate my phone's functionality into my glasses, that I don't wear.
But I don't want AI glasses that are permanently on.
When I did customer service we had to do this as part of then training course, no idea why since we didn't choose whether or not to record calls, they were all recorded.
I think the way it works is the customer is told, before the call starts, that the call is recorded, if they continue with the call that's consent, however now consent already exists for the call to be recorded, they can record your call and they don't have to tell you, because your consent to the call being recorded is kind of assumed.
But you have to actually get that consent, you can't just assume that people will be okay with being recorded, you have to tell them that a call will be recorded. Critically this has to be before the call starts you can't tell them after the fact.
So in this case you would have to wear a t-shirt that says "I'm recording everything", and if people don't like it they won't talk to you.
10 piattaforme alternative a Booking e AirBnB per un turismo più etico
10 piattaforme alternative a Booking e AirBNB per un turismo più etico - L'INDIPENDENTE
Andreste mai in vacanza prenotando il vostro alloggio in strutture che, mentre scegliete il vostro soggiorno al mare o in montagna, propongono case vacanze e appartamenti nei territori occupati illegalmente in Cisgiordania e Gerusalemme Est? Se la ri…Mario Catania (Lindipendente.online)
reshared this
RFanciola e Paolo Redaelli reshared this.
interessante, qualche anno fa avevo fatto un articolo simile (forse è da aggiornare ora): lealternative.net/2020/07/17/a… tutte queste realtà hanno pochissimo seguito e adesioni, io ho provato ogni tanto a usarle ma non erano praticamente mai presenti nelle città in cui mi servivano e quando trovavo qualcosa era a dei prezzi spesso inaccessibili.
Attualmente forse la cosa più efficace è cercare su Booking e poi, una volta trovato il posto giusto, cercarlo su internet per vedere se affitta le camere anche senza Booking ma con un proprio sistema di prenotazioni. Spesso facendo cosi si spende però di più perché, da quanto so, gli alberghi che si associano a Booking non possono mettere sul proprio sito stanze a prezzi più convenienti.
Questo vale di sicuro per Airbnb, dove ormai trovi non solo affittacamere occasionali ma anche agriturismi o affittacamere veri.
Sinceramente booking per me non esiste neanche.
Di conseguenza il mio suggerimento è usare Airbnb per avere un minimo di garanzie e qualche recensione e poi cercare il posto direttamente. Airbnb guadagna lo stesso e sta al gioco senza problemi, booking è più old-style stile tassisti ormai
like this
adhocfungus, Raoul Duke, Australis13, SuiXi3D e FartsWithAnAccent like this.
Technology reshared this.
like this
onewithoutaname e yessikg like this.
yessikg likes this.
At the very least my most played game ever isn't supported and never will be.
So if I go full linux i will just have to stop playing a game I played for almost 10 years and a game that was owned by a small game dev studio when I started playing. It sucks. I couldn't guess some Epic games would buy this game and then officially make sure it won't run on linux.
it's gotta be League right?
Edit: whoops I read the comment incorrectly it most definitely is not
It's Rocket League.
It worked for a long time on linux. But then Epic Games came in and made very sure it couldn't be played competitively anymore.
At least I think you cannot play online anymore on linux.
like this
yessikg likes this.
I think It may actually work indeed !
I'm gonna retry it but initially it's this post that made me think it was over for RL on linux :
epicgames.com/help/en-US/c-Cat…
I will definitely try again in case it's just Epic Games saying it won't work but proton saving the day.
Thanks for the correction I truly thought Epic had killed linux RL via their anticheat.
like this
yessikg likes this.
Oh heck yeah!
Yeah, I was running it through Heroic launcher and it worked great.
Hope it still works for you, what a nice win that would be!
like this
yessikg likes this.
Thanks for the feedback. I genuinely thought that since Epic Games was saying that online matchmaking wouldn't work it was hopeless.
But I will be really pumped if I don't have to reboot on Windows to play RL.
I tried it a few months ago and couldn't get it to work. May just have been me, but even if I, a semi tech literate person has problems with it, good fucking luck getting the broader population to use Linux. It is simply too hard for regular people to do stuff, that just works with windows.
Sure windows has it's issues, but they're issues 95% of people will never encounter. Instead they'll have an easy time installing software, and don't have to look at a database to figure out wether or not they can even play a game.
like this
yessikg likes this.
The only games that won't run are Battlefield and Cod, LoL, etc
And to be honest, if you play those games, you are most likely a machorchist anyway.
The only games that won't run are Battlefield and Cod, LoL, etc
Oh really ?
That's a bold statement.
Also I suppose it's my own fault for wanting to play competitive multiplayer games online on Linux ?
It's impressive because you probably hope for the same thing as me for gaming on linux but you are toxic as fuck and only think your type of games should be supported.
We are supposed to be in the same team but you shit on the games I want to play instead.
Honestly fuck you.
Edit : My god I shouldn't have watched your comment history.
That AOSP comment my dude...
my own fault for wanting to play competitive multiplayer games online on Linux ?
Yes, that's what I said. If you are able to play competitive stuff nowadays, your nerves should be able to put up with the pain of dual booting.
But dual booting still means using Windows even if it is just for gaming. Which is exactly what I fucking do.
I use W10 and PopOS as dual boot and play all I can on linux.
I even just setup everything for secure boot to work properly on both OS.
But no I'm such a masochist for wanting to just continue ln playing a game like rocket league with my friends online. What a madman.
And it's also my fault if some big dev studios bought a game I liked and then said that linux players have too many cheaters and that they block this platform.
And then there is you on the sideline, all sneakering and enjoying the fact that another cannot play the games they love on their linux platform. So yeah I repeat it, fuck you for hoping the games I play dont get support.
yessikg likes this.
World's first 'thermodynamic computing chip' reaches tape out
Noise-Driven Computing: A Paradigm Shift
A new era in computing is here! Thermodynamic computing, akin to probabilistic computing, harnesses noise for efficient problem-solving. Imagine a world where physics-based ASICs tailor solutions to specific needs.Dina Genkina (IEEE Spectrum)
like this
Oofnik likes this.
like this
qupada likes this.
like this
osaerisxero likes this.
Man I would love to have access to chips like this.
Probabilistic computing would really benefit from this, I would invest in the company producing these.
FRYD
in reply to Optional • • •Tja
in reply to FRYD • • •The only thing people around me seem to use ai for is essentially code completion, test case development and email summaries. I don't know a single person who uses Snapchat. It's like the world is diverse and tools have uses.
"I hate tunnel boring machines, none of my buddies has an use for a tunnel boring machine, and they are expensive and consume a ton of energy"
FRYD doesn't like this.
FRYD
in reply to Tja • • •Tja
in reply to FRYD • • •FRYD
in reply to Tja • • •Tja
in reply to FRYD • • •FRYD
in reply to Tja • • •The post isn’t about locally hosted models amigo.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_…
form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)