In the mid-1950s, IBM approached Jacques Perret, a Classics professor at the Sorbonne, with a question. They were about to sell a new kind of computer in France, the Model 650. What, they asked, should it be called? Not the model itself, but rather the whole class of device it represented. An obvious option was calculateur, the literal French translation of ‘computer’. But IBM wanted something that conveyed more than arithmetic. ‘Dear Sir,’ Perret replied,
How about ordinateur? It is a correctly formed word, which is even found in Littré [the standard 19th-century French dictionary] as an adjective designating God who brings order to the world. A word of this kind has the advantage of easily supplying a verb, ordiner … (My translation.)
Besides, Perret added, the implicitly feminine connotation already present in IBM’s marketing materials could carry over to the new term:
Re-reading the brochures you gave me, I see that several of your devices are designated by female agent names (trieuse, tabulatrice). Ordinatrice would be perfectly possible … My preference would be to go for l’ordinatrice electronique.
The female reference was not entirely inappropriate. Up until the mid-20th century, the term ‘computer’ meant an office clerk, usually a woman, performing calculations by hand, or with the help of a mechanical device. IBM’s new machine, however, was intended for general information-processing. The masculine and godlike version prevailed. The term soon entered common language. Every computer in France became known as an ordinateur.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Well this is how that technology is going to play out. For the first couple years it will be extremely helpful, to the point that the users stop depending on their own internal memories and their brains start pruning that functionality out. Then generative AI will be used to fill in missing details prior to the start of using them. And then they are going to slowly start feeding more and more lies until they are cheerful about being slaves.
Assistive technology is a massive area of development in smart glasses; it absolutely is being designed for people with vision and hearing impairments.
The thing with neuralink is that (even here) it was quite common to find defenders of it using OPs argument, like it will change the life of the blind and not become just another way of invading our privacy and bombard us with ads.
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.
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.
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.
Is it better to drop out of Harvard than a less prestigious college? Is your inability to complete the course at a famous university in some way better?
Most insults are scatterological or sexual in nature. But you must understand that the word isn't the thing itself. I don't think anyone has sexual aspirations of Spez
Yeah; I just chalk it up to the fact that humans for thousands of years have been obsessed with sex and poop on a level more basic than language - it's not as surprising then to think our language is riddled with allusions to it.
100% it can, and worse yet, it can be scraped and analyzed like this by Meta, or Reddit, or your nearest fascist dictator.
But that's also pretty much the entire internet in any forum or social media platform, so although I don't like it, I figure that's more or less just part of using the internet.
To me it's much like the whole "There's no expectation of privacy in public."
I hope it doesn't take AI to figure out my attitudes when I regularly proclaim that there are no maga in my life more than required by various pre-existing obligation, Luigi Mangione will be remembered as a folk hero, Trump will one day be shown to be ALL through the Epstein files in all the worst ways (as will many Dems and they should all be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law), and most Democratic leadership is 100% owned by the oligarchy too, as evidenced by things such as their support of Israeli genocide and how much more urgently they are fighting Mamdani than they are Trump in many cases.
Most importantly, by using Lemmy you aren't enriching a techno-fascist platform. They can scrape lemmy the same way they used to scrape reddit, but at least my content does not benefit a greedy little pig boy fascist fucknut.
But what's the good thing? Yeah Lemmy might not be doing it but I can do it, and Elon can, and Zuck, and Putin and your grandmom. Whatever you post on Lemmy is as public as it can get.
I think their point is there's nothing stopping Lemmy mods from using the exact same type of AI summarization tools. It may not be built-in, but many instances have their own addons for improving moderation
Corporations have been already making profiles of various types for a while now in the form of adtech, social media, data brokers, people search websites, credit scores, devices and services that harvest sensitive and intimate data (e.g. mobile phone apps, watching habits from smart TVs, driving data from cars).
Our society has been set up for mass surveillance in a thousand different ways as a form of social control and dominance by those who wield power.
It's time people realize that privacy is a right instead of normalizing abuses of consent.
And if anyone doubts this, 15 years ago I had made a tool that created these types of profiles as a proof of concept.
I had scraped tons of subreddits, then you could pass in a user and based on both their subreddits and key words would categorize users across a few axes. That was just using naïve bayes, but worked pretty well.
The AI is just much much better at natural language processing to pull out more detailed info about patterns.
*Have been made long ago and are being constantly updated.
Snowden already warned us about this over a DECADE ago. Their scopes and powers will have increased exponentially. And that was under 'trustworthy' administration. I guarantee there's a type of system in place that flags people before they do anything, just on pattern recognition alone. Of course, they can't use that system as a legal basis for anything, so they don't and use parallel constructions instead.
Anyone who thinks "this is coming" hasn't been paying attention. We're already there and beyond.
I already assumed that all project 2025 purges to date have been done with input from statistical modeling, in a way that removes far more "liberals" who might refuse orders, and retains as many MAGA/fascist bootlickers as possible.
I find the funniest shit ever is how Snowden uncovered the biggest shit show and nothing happened. Probably the starting event for me losing all hope in this pathetic species I now call Homo Merda.
I wonder if being made aware of the extensive NSA spying actually had a suppressing effect on taking action itself. It was kinda scary. Overwhelming. "Best not to think about it" kind of stuff.
It was well over a decade ago that a store figured out a teen was pregnant. The father was livid they were advertising pregnancy stuff to her. He ate his words.
That's probably a massive GDPR violation. Automated processing of extra sensitive data like political beliefs and religion is not outright forbidden but it's subject to extra protections.
I doubt it, since all it ostensibly does is summarize info the user has released freely. How that info is stored and retained exactly might be up for debate though.
GDPR article 9 (1) says you can't play algorithmic guess with people's religion or political opinions unless you gave express permission to the service provider to do it (i.e. it's not covered in the general GDPR boilerplate)
Hard agree with this. Does Reddit even have lawyers, or are they just using ChatGPT? Google, Meta, and Tik Tok already paid PII misuse fines for less than this. everything listed is part of the GDPR extended PII list.
Nah, I think all of it is literally just public data offered up by users themselves. If you didn't want those opinions shared, you shouldn't have posted them on Reddit.
What counts as an algorithm? Surely it can't be the actual definition of algorithm.
Because in most forum software (even the older stuff that predates reddit or social media) if I just click on a username, that fetches from the database every comment that the user has ever made, usually sorted in reverse chronological order. That technically fits the definition of an algorithm, and presents that user's authored content in a manner that correlates the comments with the same user, regardless of where it originally appeared (in specific threads).
So if it generates a webpage that shows the person once made a comment in a cooking subreddit that says "I'm a Muslim and I love the halal version" next to a comment posted to a college admissions subreddit that says "I graduated from Harvard in 2019" next to a comment posted to a gardening subreddit that says "I live in Berlin," does reddit violate the GDPR by assembling this information all in one place?
Meta got a fine of over a billion euros. Google got a bunch of smaller fines, but it's probably way above everyone else in terms of fines. Microsoft got half a billion. Even Apple got an 8 million euro fine, but that was more a tap in the wrist to make them think twice about some data collection.
And besides this, large companies are constantly in contact with the authorities and in smaller violations the general policy is to give a warning and let companies stop the illegal data processing voluntarily.
The screenshot shows an llm summary of a users posting history. Is that what you mean by “determine belief values stance and more” ? Is there more to this? How is that summary different from scrolling through someone’s posting history to see what they post about?
The post title makes it sound like Reddit is doing some sort of automated classification of user politics with some sort of ml technique. But the screenshot does not show that. It shows an llm summary of a users posting history . If the tool was run on a user that posted exclusively to a cat subreddit, the summary would have been about how the user likes cats. Despite the utility or accuracy of llm summaries, what the screenshot shows is far more anodyne than what this post’s title implies is happening.
How is that summary different from scrolling through someone’s posting history to see what they post about?
How is reading the Clif notes/summary different from reading the book? Time and effort taken, as well as a much shallower understanding of the material (assuming your summary is even relatively accurate).
It's an easy way to get an instant opinion of someone so you can make a determination on whether you like it without having to tax your poor brain into actually thinking, and you can let something decide your opinion before you even know what you want to know. A summary provided by a product that is notoriously frequently wrong or lies and makes shit up out of whole cloth.
We (smart people) knew this was the end result of ai and why the far right and ccorporations love it. But holy fucking shit this is dangerous and people should be terrified of this. Stop using these platforms (I know it doesn't matter the platform, we're all fucked, but still)
My concern is that Reddit can sell their profiling algorithm to other companies, who then can federate with Lemmy, mastodon, etc. to build profiles against users.
It's getting to the point where I may need to go back to cycling usernames every few years.
It's getting to the point where I may need to go back to cycling usernames every few years.
You should definitely do that anyways, you never know when some crazy is going to try and dox you. Changing usernames won’t really protect you from advertisers though, software will link the two identities together.
Let this be a reminder to anyone with an account with over a thousand comments: time for a new one.
Facebook can figure out all of this about you just from what you like and what links you click. Now imagine what a fucking goldmine a few years of your post history is to a deep learning algorithm – let alone someone who’s been using the same Reddit account for two decades. I bet they know those people better than they know themselves.
Spez will fuck with Reddit's userbase and make the platform absolute bullshit to use, yet 90% of redditors will still keep sucking his dick over and over again.
"LeMmY iS tOo HaRd To UsE!! wTf Is An InStAnCe???"
I think a lot of people on reddit forget that it's a forum. They see reddit as this special thing, when in fact it's not. My best description to people about Lemmy is it's a bunch of reddits that all can see eachother and none are owned by some corporation looking to harvest your info. It's like reddit, but better. As for which instance? Roll a dice and pick one, it doesn't matter all that much. I'm on lemmy.world and I don't even know half the time I just surf around. Other than that anything that makes reddit better then Lemmy is purely due to the fact it has a larger and longer established user base.
I just try to describe it like email. "You've got your gmails and your outlooks and your yahoos and whatnot, you pick one you like, but they're all email and it won't stop you seeing emails from outlook guys if you're a gmail guy."
I think that on the first wave of users when we had 200k active users Lemmy was in a very different state in terms of usabilities. So much has improved and if we get another event like that I'm sure we will retain way more users.
"I can imagine a future where a lot of people really trust ChatGPT’s advice for their most important decisions," Sam Altman said. "Although that could be great, it makes me uneasy." Me too, Sam.
I like Tiktok for funny and helpful videos, but I deleted it because I realized the algorithm was controlling too much of what I was seeing. I realized it was starting to shape my opinions and split.
Their algorithm is a drug and spreads propaganda just like Facebook. Stay far away.
Good on you for making that realization. Most TikTok users I encounter do not have that level of self-reflection. I‘m not sure if I would have it if I ever installed it. I mean when you‘re constantly surrounded by the algorithmic equivalent of yes-men on TikTok, any opposition outside your bubble must look like a glitch. It seems pretty tough to break out of that.
GitHub. > HTML isn’t only for people working in the tech field. It’s for anybody, the way documents are for anybody. HTML is just another type of document. A very special one—the one the web is built on. > > I’m Blake Watson. I’ve been building websites since the early 2000s. Though I work professionally in the field, I feel strongly that anyone should be able to make a website with HTML if they want. This book will teach you how to do just that. It doesn’t require any previous experience making websites or coding. I will cover everything you need to know to get started in an approachable and friendly way. > > Ready? Let’s do it!
IMO all those examples are less readable than writing it in an imperative way using good function and variable names.
Also, len() is a Python convention and a built-in function that calls __len__() on that object. It's even more established than .length in JS, so I really don't see why someone would expect anything else. And even then, one could call my_list.__len__() if they really wanted to be sure and have that "left to right" bonus.
Comprehension is functional programming too, they arise from list monad schoolofhaskell.com/school/sta… And Haskell do notation indeed reads top-down, unlike Python, but I find both quite readable.
I'm always suspicious of people who say that a language is suboptimal and use as evidence some filthy one-liner. Maybe if you bothered to write some whitespace and didn't write the language ignorant of its features (like generator expressions) you would end up with better code?
sum(
all(
abs(x) >= 1 and abs(x) <= 3 for x in line
) and (
all(x > 0 for x in line) or
all(x < 0 for x in line)
)
for line in diffs
)
You no longer have to "jump back and forth" except one single time - you have to look to the end to see where line is coming from and then you can read the body of the main expression from start to finish.
People don't, in fact, read code from top to bottom, left to right; they read it by first looking at its "skeleton" - functions, control flow, etc - until finding the bit they think is most important to read in detail. That implies that "jumping back and forth" is a natural and necessary part of reading (and hence writing) code, and so is nothing to fear.
There is still a slight advantage to not having to jump around, but consider the costs: in Javascript, map and filter are methods on Array and some other types. So how are you going to implement them for your custom iterable type? Do you have to do it yourself, or write lots of boilerplate? It's easy in Python. It's not bad in Rust either because of traits, but what this all means is that to get this, you need other, heavy, language features.
In practice, you often know what a comprehension is iterating over due to context. In those situations, having what the comprehension produces be the most prominent is actually a boon. In these scenarios in Rust/JS you are left skipping over the unimportant stuff to get to what you actually want to read.
I agree with you that the one liner isn't a good example, but I do prefer the "left to right" syntax shown in the article. My brain just really likes getting the information in this order: "Iterate over Collection, and for each object do Operation(object)".
The cost of writing member functions for each class is a valid concern. I'm really interested in the concept of uniform function call syntax for this reason, though I haven't played around with a language that has it to get a feeling of what its downsides might be.
I was also thinking about UFCS. I do like it for its flexibility, but I did try it in Nim one time and was left feeling unsure. Unfortunately I now can't remember what exactly I didn't like about it.
People don’t, in fact, read code from top to bottom, left to right
100% this.
This false premise is also why a few (objectively wrong) people defend writing long essays: functions with hundreds of lines and files with thousands; saying "then you don't have to go back and forth to read it", when in fact, no one should be reading it like a novel in the first place.
Once you get used with list and dict comprehensions, they read just fine. Much like the functional approach is not really that readable for a newcomer either.
Not a single time did OOP talk about readability. That was not a point at all, so I don't know why you are all about readability.
It was all about having a language that the IDE can help you write in because it knows what you are talking about from the beginning of the line.
The issue with the horrible one-liner (and with your nicely split-up version) is that the IDE has no idea what object you are talking about until the second-to-last non-whitespace character. The only thing it can autocomplete is "diffs". Up until you typed the word, it has no idea whether sum(), all(), abs(), <, >, or for-in actually exist for the data type you are using.
If you did the same in Java, you'd start with diffs and from then on the IDE knows what you are talking about, can help you with suggesting functions/methods, can highlight typos and so on.
I think rust's iterator chains are nice, and IDE auto-complete is part of that niceness. But comprehension expressions read very naturally to me, more so than iterator chains.
I mean, how many python programmers don't even type hint their code, and so won't get (accurate) auto-complete anyway? Auto-completion is nice but just not the be-all and end-all.
Fair, I missed one word. You missed the whole blog post.
It's a big difference between writing code and writin APIs, tbh. If you write crap code that's your problem. If you write crap APIs it's the problem of anyone using your API.
The blog post is really about language design, because you definitely should not write a filter method for your custom iterable class in python; you should make it use the language's interface's for "being an iterable". Language design involves APIs offered by the language, but isn't really the purview of most people who write APIs.
If a suggestion on language design would gain something at the cost of readability, anyone should be very skeptical of that.
Those things together explain why I am evaluating the post mostly in terms of readability.
Is string length len, length, size, count, num, or # ? Is there even a global function for length? You won’t know until you try all of them.
This is Python basics, so the argument would be to optimize readability specifically for people who have zero familiarity with the language.
(The other examples have the same general direction of readability tradeoff to the benefit of beginners, this one was just simplest to pick here)
That's a valid tradeoff to discuss, if discussed as a tradeoff. Here it is not. The cost to readability for anyone with language familiarity appear to be not even understood.
The point of the article is about how IDE's can't validate certain things as you type them in this order. The example of a string length function could be replaced by any other API.
But, the reason for wanting the IDE to validate based on partially entered expressions is given as making it easier to follow the code for a person working left-to-right.
And it's not an invalid thing to want, but I expect the discussion to also include how it affects reading the code for a non-beginner.
It's got nothing to do with being a beginner. I've been working as a professional software developer for ~15 years now and still I have to use new libraries/frameworks/in-house dependencies quite frequently. I know how to get the length of a string, and so does the author of the article.
But that's why it's a simple example and nothing more, and it applies to everything else. We write left to right, and IDEs autocomplete left to right, so it makes sense for languages to be designed to work that way.
There's a lot of reasons why Java works much better with IDEs than python, and this is one of them.
Besides that, it is best practice to show problems on simple, easy to follow use cases that highlight exactly the problem in question without further fluff. It's expected that a non-beginner can abstract that problem into more difficult use cases, so I don't think OOP did anything wrong with choosing string length as an example.
The example of a string length function could be replaced by any other API
I don't know about that, len is a built-in -- like str, abs, bool. There are only a few of them and they're well known by people familiar to the language (which seems to exclude the article author). Their use is more about the language itself than about what to expect from a particular API.
In fact, most Python APIs that go beyond built-in usage actually look much more object-oriented with "left-to-right" object.method() calls. So this argument seems silly and goes away with some familiarity with that language.
The argument is not silly, it totally makes sense, and your point even proves that.
A lot of libraries use module-level globals and if you use from imports (especially from X import *) you get exactly that issue.
Yes, many more modern APIs use an object-oriented approach, which is left-to-right, and that's exactly what OOP is argueing for. If you notice, he didn't end the post with "Make good languages" but with "Make good APIs". He highlights a common problem using well-known examples and generalizes it to all APIs.
The auther knows full well that this blog post will not cause Python to drop the List comprehension syntax or built-in functions. What he's trying to do is to get people to not use non-LTR approaces when designing APIs. All the points he made are correct, and many are even more pressing in other languages.
For example, for a hobby project of mine I have to use C/C++ (microcontrollers). And this problem is huge in C libraries. Every function is just dumped into the global name space and there's no way to easily find the right function. Often I have to go to google and search for an external documentation or open up the header files of a project to find a function that does what I want, instead of being able to just follow the IDE autocomplete on an object.
And sure, if I know every library and framework I use inside out and memorized all functions, methods, objects, variables and fields, then it's easy, but unless you work 30 years in a bank where you maintain the same old cobol script for decades, that's not going to happen.
That's malpractice in most cases, and thankfully, becoming more rare to find in the wild. Any decent linter will shout at you for using star imports.
What he’s trying to do is to get people to not use non-LTR approaces when designing APIs.
Then he should have picked examples of APIs that break this, not use the built-in functions. Because as it reads now, it seems he is just against established conventions for purism.
this problem is huge in C libraries
yeah, one of my favorite things about python is that everything not in the language itself is either defined in the file, or explicitly imported. Unless, like mentioned, you have anti-patterns like star imports and scripts messing with globals().
He's using simple examples that everyone knows and understands instantly. It's like using a minimal test case to report a bug. In most cases a minimal test case is also nonsensical on its own, but it's used to show an issue that occurred in a more complex context without overloading the reader with useless garbage info that doesn't contribute to the point at hand.
I'll agree that list comprehensions can be a bit annoying to write because your IDE can't help you until the basic loop is done, but you solve that by just doing [thing for thing in things] and then add whatever conditions and attr access/function calls you need.
I'm kinda surprised that pretty much nobody who commented here seems to have understood the point of the post.
It wasn't about readability at all.
It was about designing APIs that the IDE can help you with.
With RTL syntax the IDE doesn't know what you are talking about until the end of the line because the most important thing, the root object, the main context comes last. So you write your full statement and the IDE has no idea what you are on about, until you end at the very end of your statement.
Take a procedural-style statement:
len(str(myvar))
When you type it out, the IDE has no idea what you want to do, so it begins suggesting everything in the global namespace starting with l, and when you finish writing len(, all it can do is point out a syntax error for the rest of the line. Rinse and repeat for str and myvar.
Object-oriented, the IDE can help out much more:
myvar.tostring().length()
With each dot the IDE knows what possible methods you cound mean, the autocomplete is much more focussed and after each () there are no open syntax errors and the IDE can verify that what you did was correct. And it you have a typo or reference a non-existing method it can instantly show you that instead having to wait until the end of the whole thing.
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…
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.
Infatti devi contattarli direttamente via mail o telefono e a quel punto ti fanno il prezzo che gli pare, non sono legati a niente. 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
eh si, l'unica è quello. Purtroppo dipende un po' dal tipo di viaggio, non sempre è semplice. Se si fa un viaggio singolo in una sola città si può provare a fare, ma già se si inizia a fare un viaggio itinerante con più alberghi/posti per più giorni inizia purtroppo a essere difficoltoso riuscire a organizzare e contattare tutti correttamente soprattutto se si va in posti dove non si parla la lingua locale...
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.
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.
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...
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.
From an organizational standpoint, it doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
The group will be split into four smaller groups, according to a New York Times report. One group will focus on AI research, another one on infrastructure and hardware projects, one on AI products, and another one on building out AI superintelligence, a hypothetical AI system that could outperform human intelligence on any and all scales.
I mean, they have different skillsets, a fair bit of that is going to be on decoupled timelines, they have different levels of risk, and the technical expertise is going to differ. One succeeding or failing isn't tightly coupled to another doing so. Sure, they all relate to one thing or another to something that has been called "AI", but that's a pretty broad group.
Under this scenario Russia would have military and economic control of occupied Ukraine under its own governing body, imitating Israel’s de facto rule of Palestinian territory seized from Jordan in 1967.
...
Witkoff, who is also tasked by Trump with bringing peace to the Middle East, is understood to support the idea, which the Americans believe circumvents barriers in the Ukrainian constitution to ceding territory without holding an “all-Ukraine” referendum.
I assume that also means that Russia would then send in state-sponsored terrorists in the guise of "settlers" to murder the Ukrainians and incrementally steal their land, and send in the army to slaughter them if they dare to fight back.
It isn't a question of stupidity. It's a question of power.
Without Western arms and armor to hold territory, both Israel and Russia can just seize the land and kill anyone who objects.
Ukrainians can know it's bullshit in the same way the Palestinians (or Armenians or Tutsis or Rohingra Muslims) can know they are getting a raw deal. But what are they going to do about it, except eat lead?
I haven't heard about thermodynamic computing before, but it sounds pretty interesting. As IEEE Spectrum explains , "the components of a thermodynamic chip begin in a semi-random state. A program is fed into the components, and once equilibrium is reached between these parts, the equilibrium is read out as the solution. This computation style only works with applications that involve a non-deterministic result ... various AI tasks, such as AI image generation and other training tasks, thrive on this hardware." It sounds almost like quantum computing to my layperson ears. [edit: fixed link]
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.
If it makes AI cheaper then great because AI is a massive fucking waste of power, but other than that I am grossed out by this tech and want none of it.
"If we cannot produce them (hundreds of transissions) in Germany, we will relocate these volumes to a different plant, for example to the U.S.. This might take maybe 8 to 10 months, but, if there's no move forward, we will do it because we have this business," Sagel said.
Anyone with a conscious would say. "Okay cool, if you so desperately want to cooperate with convicted war criminals, then do it elsewhere". Maybe it should even go further and this type of blatant law dodging should just be directly criminalized with the ones in charge facing some nice prison time?
Sorta like how corporations pushed recycling onto the public to deflect from their own culpability for pollution. Why would we regulate the companies building huge data centers when we can get average people to absorb the cost? It's not like they're making obscene profits while laying off untold thousands.
I mean, if that was the case, sure, let's have them pay to clean up the waste they generate. But have you seen NVIDIA, Microsoft, or Meta lately? These companies are barely staying in business. Their CEOs can hardly afford to ride the bus to work. Let's cut them a break.
TLDR: It's your fault the earth is dying because you horde emails.
OP hit the nail on the head. This is once again shifting the blame (and guilt) onto individuals who even collectively have fuck-all impact on the problem in question.
The worst of it is, some people will believe this shit.
What’s even more infuriating is the numbers of people who fail to recognize that all of these companies sell these goods and services to consumers and it is those consumers who can reduce the demand.
In the case of AI, even if consumers actively try and avoid products with AI, it's difficult. There are studies showing customers are generally less likely to buy a product if it's described as having AI features, so the overall market demand is already for consumer products to have less AI. The demand companies are catering to is from investors, who don't need to care about whether it's viable to sell anything until after the bubble pops.
There was/is a demand for slavery. Should we wait for these people to realize that maybe owning slaves is not okay and morally wrong? Or should we just outright ban slavery and not give two fucks how "the market forces" view such action? You tell me.
Your argument is, correct me if I'm wrong, that the demand for product X always necessetates its production/supply and that supply will cease when there is no more demand.
A valid argument based on basic market economic principles.
I argue that there are times, when the demand for something does not outweigh the cost incurred (by the society) from the production and supply of a product. Meaning there are cases, such as this one, when it is almost impossible to decrease demand and thus influence the production which in turn would decrease the cost incurred by the society. In my view, the State has to protect foremost its citizenry, not ginormous enterprises. If this protection means going against "market forces", then so be it.
Both "products" cause harm to society while only a few benefit, so no, it was not a false equivalence.
But then again, I could be mistaken and feel free to correct me on anything. 😀)
It's virtually impossible to exist online these days without generative AI bullshit being shoved in your face with no means to opt-out. It's clearly not consumers driving this so-called "demand," because savvy people don't want this to begin with and never did. Rather, it's the desperate speculative hype around this dumb nonproduct that's causing big businesses to set electricity and money on fire with AI slop to no tangible benefit.
A saner response from the UK government would be to tell these companies to either power their AI datacenters with renewables or get out, rather than trying to guilt trip individuals over, of all the goddamned stupid things, undeleted emails.
That's not the take-home here. We should regulate large companies, but as ever, individual choices both have direct effects on the environment, and indirect effects which influence the behaviour of a small number of more powerful organisations. Also important is that individual choices in the political realm influence what regulations get made, so we're never absolved of a responsibility to the environment.
The take-home for me is that the government is using long-discredited statistics relating storage to water usage. Stored emails don't increase water usage by an appreciable percentage.
More processing might result in more water use, but storage? It makes no actual sense. Having more stuff sitting in your storage isn’t making your computer hotter.
In fact, I guess creating a guideline for servers to use more efficient processors would do much more for that.
tape storage is for offline storage, and any data storage on it would also be redundant
writing and reading tape archives takes a lot of computing. usually you have your tape library server and a server hosting the app and then the tape sled. tape takes a lot of energy
so deleting it electronically is going to take a more energy
it's more efficient to overwrite it or use a degaussing device to wipe the tape
the people who thought of that example are ignorant of how data centers work
Almost all politicians are ignorant about tech, yet we let them regulate it. In the worst ways. And fail to regulate it where it ought to be regulated.
I'll say it again, because I think the idea is a practical solution to the issue: electricity and water usage should be charged at reverse volume, the more you use, the more expensive it becomes.
This would actually incentivise companies to reduce their usage, to question if they actually need that new AI data centre that will eat up all the gains in renewable electricity production and require fossil fuel plants to continue running, it'll reduce the crypto miners as well, and encourage everyone to try to reduce their usage.
The knock on effect of this is that electricity actually becomes cheaper for everyone.
I think UK government has no idea what they're doing. First the stupid age verification which will eventually result in massive leak of private information, now this.
If they wanted to save the environment they should push for mix of nuclear and renewable energy sources. But that requires effort...
Nell’affollato teatro tradizionale di Chengdu, un importante evento storico viene presentato al pubblico, enfatizzando le capacità di un personaggio che sfuma nella leggenda.
Roskomnadzor, Russia’s state censorship agency, has officially confirmed it is restricting voice calls on the “foreign” messaging applications WhatsApp and Telegram, a move it clai...
Real criminal organizations literally have their own software. That software has proprietary encryption, and masquerades as regular internet traffic. Frequent updates are made to change the patterns it uses so it remains undetected.
Both chinese vessels attempted to ram the stern of the fillipino vessel. They missed and collided with each other. The chinese coast guard cutters bow ended up smashed in. They were fortunate they did not sink. The filipino coast guard cutter offered aid to the damaged vessel.
There is also a vast amount of space between a normal human body and the bodies that most Americans now have. That has nothing to do with the unrealistic beauty standards in media (which is also a thing)
Obesity is bad, and it annoys me when people start defending it as being beautiful. It's not, it will kill you in loads of unpleasant ways.
Nobody in the thread above mentioned obesity. Nobody is saying you have to be attracted to obese people. Or disputing that it's unhealthy.
It remains true that there is a lot of space between this extreme and the extreme portrayed in media. Body weight is not the only standard, it's one of many.
... Nobody mentioned obesity but we're talking about body weight... I mean, it's on topic, y'know.
And while body weight is not the only standard, it is a good indication of health. If you're twice overweight, you will die sooner and likely in a not so comfortable way. Handhaving that away with "well, it's one thing but there are others too" feels a bit disingenuous.
Yeah, there are loads of ways to die but this one is very preventable
I've read that American food is particularly bad, and you are right, but the factor contributing most is the metabolism with which you are born, other things important are levels of stress, ability to sleep well.
Exercise is important, yes. Eating right is as well. Just keep in mind that some things are outside your control, and if you think your health is your own achievement, that might not be entirely correct.
The factor that matters most isn't your metabolism. If that were true we'd have sever overweight issues since thousands of years but we haven't. The overweight pandemic is caused by too much food, period.
Want to lose weight? Whatever your metabolism is, eat less, eat healthier. It's that simple.
Yeah, exercise a lot, that's healthy and needed. It won't make you think though unless you really exercise a lot (3+ hours a day, every day)
Easiest way is to just eat less. Eat smaller portions, stop eating processed foods, cut your sugar intake.
There are some super interesting videos of a physicist / chemist going over the basics of the chemistry involved and implications of it, I can send those if you're interested
There are some super interesting videos of a physicist / chemist going over the basics of the chemistry involved and implications of it, I can send those if you’re interested
The Russian leader will say he wants peace as long as it serves his interests – and play on the president’s desperation to ‘make a deal’ quickly, says Guardian columnist Rafael Behr
The vast majority of Israelis say they are not troubled by reports of famine and suffering in Gaza, a new poll released by the Israel Democracy Institute shows.
The survey shows that 79 percent of Jews in Israel were not troubled, or troubled at all, whereas 86 percent of “Arab” respondents were somewhat or very troubled by the reports about the war on Gaza.
This is the type of unhinged take that shouldn't be welcomed in discourse. The reason why people are critical of Israel or Russia or Saudi Arabia or Iran or whatever is because they're not bothered enough by the death and suffering. The whole point is to get them to deradicalize as a society so they won't dehumanize other people. We went to bring them to the level everybody else is at, radicalizing ourselves to dehumanize them, that's just making the problem worse.
Middle East Eye is a notorious propaganda outlet, especially on this conflict. I would take anything they say with a grain of salt, including their interpretations of polls and surveys. I personally recommend everybody here to actually look at the original source and the same information referenced directly from there. The survey cited in this article is pretty extensive, and I think it's worth taking a look at:
78% of Jewish Israelis and 22.5% of Arab Israelis think that, given the circumstances of the fighting in Gaza, Israel is making efforts to avoid causing suffering to the Palestinian population there.
It's the primary source of this post dingus. You're consuming it either way. If you find it preferable to digest the info through a notoriously narrative driven outlet as a middle man, then that's your problem
A nation of mostly fascists. Zionism is about the creation of a religious nationalist ethnostate through genocide.
It's pure unbridled fascism, and Israelis have been indoctrinated to believe it's okay when they do it since birth, as has a significant proportion of the Jewish diaspora. That's why the genocide continues, and why Israel is the most dangerous threat to Jewish people since Nazism.
Not quite. Zionism is about creating a secular nationalist ethnostate through genocide, with religious dressing simply as a way to get more religious Jews on board. It's no coincidence that early Zionist leaders were all unapologetically atheist.
That's not true. Zionism originates from the Jewish scriptures. Basically, Judaism talks about how Jews were promised by God, via the scriptures and the old prophets, the land of Israel as a homeland. It is the duty of Jews to resettle the holy land and establish a theological society that is based on the divine laws and systems laid out in the Torah. By doing so, Jews would achieve salvation for themselves, and eventually for the rest of the world. This global salvation will be marked by global harmony and the coming of the messiah who will guide the world in the path of God.
Virtually all Jews agree that Israel is their homeland and that they will eventually reclaim the holy land and settle it in a way that would bring salvation as they await the coming of the Messiah. Traditionally Zionism was seen as something that is out of human control and is entirely up to God's will. Essentially Jews will go back to Israel when God wills it and people have no say in the matter, any attempt by humans to accelerate the salvation is seen as blasphemous as it's an act of rebellion against God's will.
That's when modern Zionism split. Modern Zionists believe that political and secular Zionism is a tool given by God to enact his divine plan and to initiate the return of Jews back the land of Israel. Therefore following this type of Zionism is actually following God's will and it's the duty of religious Jews to pursue it.
Obviously, there's a great deal of debate among Jews about which theological branch is correct, but either way, the origins of Zionism aren't purely secular or nationalist.
Modern Zionists believe that political and secular Zionism is a tool given by God to enact his divine plan and to initiate the return of Jews back the land of Israel.
Early modern Zionists (including Herzl himself) overwhelmingly didn't believe in God in the first place.
Obviously, there's a great deal of debate among Jews about which theological branch is correct, but either way, the origins of Zionism aren't purely secular or nationalist.
You should look up Theodor Herzl. Early Zionists were straight up voting on whether they'd build their Jewish state in Palestine or Uganda, and the vote was pretty narrow if I'm not mistaken. The rationale for choosing Palestine was that it'd be easier to get religious Jews (which the guys who were thinking up this stuff were absolutely not) on board. Like, do you think Ben Gurion or Golda Mier were having theological debates?
But this is separate from what I'm talking about. I'm specifically talking about the origins of the idea itself. It's undeniably based in Jewish religious scriptures. That's where the idea comes from even if modern Zionism evolved to be something different.
I think there’s been a pretty significant divergence from the original Zionist leaders to modern day Zionism. The seeds were there, obviously, but things have deteriorated even further in the past few decades.
What meaningful divergence is there? Since the 19th century, Zionists such as Herzl were discussing means to ethnically cleanse the local populace via economic domination.
In practice, Zionists starting coming in droves armed, aiding the British in committing atrocities and suppressing Palestinian dissent and resistance. Then during the Nakba, they would straight up rape, murder, and rob the Palestinians.
Is the divergence in Zionism similar to that of Nazism, where the initial good peacenik Nazis simply wanted to peacefully relocate Europe's Jewish population to madagascar? Are we going to act like the very pursuit of an ethnostate is not problematic in and of itself?
To be charitable I think our fellow poster meant that Zionists went from at least some modesty to a full embrace of revisionist Zionism. To further the Nazi analogy, it would be like going from Italian fascism to Nazism.
You're probably right. I don't think they meant any ill. If anything, I made my words a bit harsh because I was fed a similar myth growing up. Sometimes you need a new direct and visceral perspective to see something in a new light. We need to be as ruthless towards Zionism on an ideological basis as we are towards Nazism.
The point is that trying to rebuild countries is usually a very bad idea, especially by force. Germany and Japan after WWII are very rare examples in history.
What the brainless users here are suggesting is going to turn Israel into Afghanistan or Iraq, not into Japan or Germany. It's been proven that country building just leads countries to become more extreme, and that shouldn't be the goal.
Ah I get now, you're pro genocide and ethnic cleansing, just not when it conflicts with your ideological narratives. How convenient that you lack the very principles you harp on and on about.
Also make sure to stalk my profile and write a few hundred more comments. That will surely make you less of a troll
When I went to Israel last time I was genuinely surprised how many zealots there are. Most Israelis you meet outside of the country are just normal people but Israel itself is still full of mentally deranged. Religion is a hell of a drug.
If you really mean Israelis outside of Israel and not just Jewish people, that's probably just code shifting. They know their opinions aren't acceptable outside their bubble, so they keep quiet. It's the same way a white supremacist will talk differently if they think any random white guy shares their views vs when an imposing minority is in the room.
I think it's a little different. The Israelis who actually live or travel outside of Israel tend to usually be the educated, open minded ones. They're usually the ones who want a two state solution and oppose wars. The whackos tend to stay in Israel. Not all Israelis are whackos, but all the Israeli whackos stay in Israel. It's kind of like how the Americans who travel or live abroad tend to be liberal, but the MAGA types never even leave the country.
So how come there are tons of Israeli groups abroad from Israel who push zionist propaganda?
They need to renounce their bullshit faith or be ready to take in the backlash. It's all made up (all religions), anyway, and if one can't see that they really don't deserve to procreate on this earth
Mexico’s president says ‘there will be no invasion … it’s absolutely off the table’ after news reports of order
Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, has rejected the idea that the US might invade Mexico after news reports suggested Donald Trump had authorized the use of military force targeting drug cartels deemed terrorist organizations in Latin American countries.
“The United States is not going to come to Mexico with their military,” she said during a daily news conference on Friday. “We cooperate, we collaborate, but there will be no invasion. It’s off the table, absolutely off the table.”
The Mexican president said her government had been informed of the executive order but insisted that “it had nothing to do with the participation of any military or any institution on our territory. There is no risk that they will invade our territory.”
If the US invades Mexico it'll overrun it within a day, no doubt. However, look at Afghanistan, Iraq. Look at how the US got beat every time. Now remember what cartels do with their enemies and imagine how many soldiers hanging from bridges it would take for the US to call it quits. Remember how many cartel soldiers there already are in the US. What do you think the Latino community will do once the US army starts the eventual murder of innocent Mexican citizens...
The US invading México will end Mexico, it will also end the US
the US invading -anyone- who isn't already seen as an enemy of the nation by the PEOPLE of the nation, will trigger an actual shooting civil war.
and by that I mean, there aren't very many countries that the majority of American people truly see as an enemy, so thats basically Russia, Iran, North Korea, to some extent China. and a bunch of countries from the middle east , central america and southeast asia who have varying histories of things vaguely "islamist, terrorist, or communist"
Mexico, and Literal Allies like Canada and other NATO countries, are not on that list. starting a war with someone not on that list, will be a signal to everyone in America who isn't a brown nosing collaborator, that their own government is rogue and has to be toppled.
I would agree if I hadn't seen already so much complacency. People just don't give a shit and act like the frog in the slowly heating up pan. I'd hope you're right but I am not so sure
And the US would still lose, because that is what the US does best.
Yeah, it can invade the shit out of everywhere, but it never has been able to keep what it invaded. As soon as the dead bodies start coming back, politicians start screaming.
México can't stop the US from invading, of course, but guerilla warfare? Bring it on. US soldiers will be hanging from bridges and videos will be posted everywhere, it will be ugly. It will be the same as in Afghanistan, and they didn't have a lack of tech there, there weren't any logistics issues as the US simply has the best logistics of any army in the world.
Then there is the fact that the US has enormous Latino communities which will start pushing back at the least, fighting back more likely. This van lest to an uprising in their own country.
Invading México will destroy Mexico, but it will also tear the US to oieces
Mexico military is too weak and corrupt, they would loose 1 vs 1 against the US military. The US can easily annex some districts in northern Mexico to form a buffer zone against the Cartels.
The US could invade any country on Earth easily. Put up a big "Mission Accomplished" banner and all that.
The occupation that follows an invasion? That's something the US isn't all that good at. The US couldn't hold Afghanistan. But with Afghanistan Americans could run home with their tail between their legs.
What your plan for withdrawing from a war on the North American continent?
Numbers of return road and air trips continue to fall after trade policy row and threats to annex country
Travel to the US by Canadian residents has continued to drop significantly for the seventh month in a row, as new data confirms that Donald Trump’s threats have helped upend the summer tourism season.
Months of aggressive rhetoric from the White House have prompted widespread boycotts of US products by Canadians, who have also sworn off visits to their southern neighbour amid lingering feelings of betrayal and anger.
Statistics Canada said on Monday that the number of Canadian residents who made a return trip to the US by car dropped 36.9% in July 2025, compared with the same month in 2024.
Am American. Do not come here if you don't absolutely have to! You will be in danger. I am very sorry for our shithole country's awful behavior. Some of us really need to feel the consequences of the people we put in power in a major way. One way people who live outside the US can help is by not coming here and not buying our products and services. Money talks and you can say enough is enough by not giving us any of yours.
The report itself has been accused of political bias, with the Trump administration softening criticism of Israel and El Salvador.
Human rights, such as freedom of expression, are under threat in Germany and other European countries, according to the 2024 Human Rights Report by the US State Department.
The report, which in former years has been seen as a reliable point of reference for global human rights advocacy, has been criticized by human rights groups as containing numerous omissions and mischaracterizations to fit the current US administration's political aims.
The report itself has been accused of political bias, with the US softening criticism of Israel and El Salvador. Germany rejected the report saying it has "a very high level of freedom of expression."
haah right... the country that cant even provide healthcare to its people, ejects brown children with cancer because 'paperwork', and provided israel all the material they needed to complete an actual genocide...
thats who is claiming some moral point? hilariously hypocritical
I don't really get why. I mean, they seemed so happy putting people in gas chambers and ovens... Can't see why wouldn't they want to be put through the same... And, most important, why should it be a big deal now when it wasn't when they were doing it.
That's far from the only issue. Of course all of the things I'd name (systemic racism, horrible prison conditions, gaps in our "universal" healthcare, dismantling of the social state) are also things the current US administration would be in favour of.
Half of the things you list are things which Germany is one of the best in the world: prison conditions, healthcare, social state. It's not perfect, sometimes is worse than it was 10 years ago, but hardly worth of calling it a "human rights issue" .
Which country checks tourists' social media for anti-Trump posts on entry?
Which country regularly arrests (and in many cases deports) both their own citizens and foreigners without consulting a court?
Which country spies on its own citizens to figure out if they may have had an abortion?
But sure, even thinking about doing something about a right-wing party that has been classified as extremist by multiple courts and explicitly lists several human rights violations as their goals... that's a step too far...
Germany is making AFD's life more difficult –> JD Vance is unhappy –> USA concludes that Germany has human rights issues and the issues are that AFD has become more active and Germany should have prevented that from happening. Okay.
Maybe USA should decide whether it's a problem to let AFD do its stuff or if it is a problem to not let AFzs do its stuff? 🙃
France, Germany and the UK have threatened UN "snapback" sanctions on Iran if Tehran does not allow IAEA inspectors into remaining nuclear facilities. The European nations gave Iran two weeks to resolve the issue.
I really don't have a problem with Iran getting nukes, but the headline is misleading as hell. Iran isn't building nukes; EU leaders are threatening sanctions over nuclear facility inspections. Also I doubt Iran cares too much about this because no matter the EU position, US secondary sanctions preclude any significant trade with the EU. This was what ultimately wrecked JCPOA.
Matrix.org Foundation - a non-profit UK Community Interest Company, incorporated to act as the neutral guardian of the standard on behalf of the whole Matrix community.
Quickest way to get food to them or just get things over with: have multiple countries send military flotillas to feed them. If Israel tries to attack it’s attacking a sovereign nation that can fight back.
Too bad though all the countries are still in the pussyfooting talk phase. Who knows, maybe they’ll be ready to take action by the time everyone is killed.
In a country once lauded as a progressive bastion in Latin America, protections are being dismantled by a populist leader, and gender-based offences are on the rise
...except the title literally includes Trump's name. Trump, the guy whose the elimination of USAID has literally.... literally....killed over 50,000 people due to removing food, medicine, and support for people around the world.
Trump is accusing others of failing to uphold human rights. Peak irony.
The reason to point out hypocrisy in politics is to get down to what the person really wants. For example, the pastor who preached against The Gays, and then ends up being convicted of grooming children. He obviously wasn't going after LGBTQ+ people out of some moral stance, so we look for other explanations. Gaining political power is one possibility.
In general, logical fallacies should be used to pick apart your own argument, not throwing it in other people's faces.
Quazatron
in reply to kerntucky • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
Midnight Wolf
in reply to Quazatron • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
thejml
in reply to Midnight Wolf • • •Duamerthrax
in reply to kerntucky • • •like this
Maeve e HarkMahlberg like this.
hagelslager
in reply to kerntucky • • •Your Scientists Were So Preoccupied With Whether Or Not They Could, They Didn’t Stop To Think If They Should
like this
Maeve, NoneOfUrBusiness e yessikg like this.
Pearl
in reply to hagelslager • • •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.
Alphane Moon
in reply to hagelslager • • •- YouTube
youtu.belike this
Maeve likes this.
katy ✨
in reply to kerntucky • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
Maeve
in reply to kerntucky • • •These evil af people.
like this
HarkMahlberg likes this.
TheAgeOfSuperboredom
in reply to Maeve • • •ghostlychonk
in reply to Maeve • • •Maeve
in reply to ghostlychonk • • •Imgonnatrythis
in reply to kerntucky • • •like this
HarkMahlberg e NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
bacon_pdp
in reply to kerntucky • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
HarkMahlberg
in reply to kerntucky • • •panda_abyss
in reply to kerntucky • • •This tech could be life changing for blind or deaf people
Too bad it’s not being designed for them.
FishFace
in reply to panda_abyss • • •panda_abyss
in reply to FishFace • • •Siegfried
in reply to panda_abyss • • •panda_abyss
in reply to Siegfried • • •Valmond
in reply to Siegfried • • •Siegfried
in reply to Valmond • • •Echo Dot
in reply to Siegfried • • •4am
in reply to kerntucky • • •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
Talaraine
in reply to kerntucky • • •ileftreddit
in reply to kerntucky • • •fubarx
in reply to kerntucky • • •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.
jaybone
in reply to fubarx • • •CosmoNova
in reply to jaybone • • •Echo Dot
in reply to CosmoNova • • •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.
paraphrand
in reply to fubarx • • •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.
Echo Dot
in reply to paraphrand • • •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.
ssillyssadass
in reply to kerntucky • • •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.
FishFace
in reply to ssillyssadass • • •Typhoon
in reply to FishFace • • •FishFace
in reply to Typhoon • • •WaistGunnerPug
in reply to kerntucky • • •shalafi
in reply to WaistGunnerPug • • •WaistGunnerPug
in reply to shalafi • • •Echo Dot
in reply to shalafi • • •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.
kdcd
in reply to WaistGunnerPug • • •Spykee
in reply to kerntucky • • •Echo Dot
in reply to kerntucky • • •