If you make a series of tubes, you can route from the router and reroute back to the router, creating an information highway through, what we call in comp science, a “loop”. Depending on which side you install the turbo, you can replicate the same tech your ISP charges extra for in “speed boost”. If you go bi-turbo—one in inbound and one in the outbound tubes of the loop—you can generate effectively unlimited speed, where onlyfans used in your inbound and outbound tubes limit based on their RPM. This is why I use RC plane turbines. It’s loud, but I’m streaming YT in 480.
That’s absurd. You don’t need to route to or from your router. That’s it’s entire job. Do you also run computations for your computer and speak on behalf of your speaker? Complete madness.
I’m no expert but from my experience it is the other way around: Upload speed increased, Download speed decreased. Which makes sense because the outgoing data is boosted by the wind whereas the incoming traffic has to overcome the wind. If you want to increase download speed I suggest placing a hoover behind the router.
If I understand correctly, there’s nothing about Firefox that makes ad blockers any harder to detect. What can Firefox and uBlock do to stop Google from blocking adblock users on the site?
That said, I use Firefox and uBlock myself, and I’ve yet to see YouTube stop me from using the site.
They can just phrase it a little differently and argue semantics in front of a bunch of 70 year olds who don’t know what a browser is in a hearing or two. Maybe a couple campaign contributions through completely legal channels and that’s that. Anti trust enforcement has been falling in the US for decades.
I know you’re joking, but it’s genuinely pathetic how much of a paper tiger the FTC is. The world we live in is one in which a company like Google can and will just tank the FTC fine and continue anti-consumer practices.
Sure, but most people will still use Google Chrome, and good luck getting Microsoft and Opera to switch to the fork. Google will still have full control over Chrome, and the layperson won’t understand why a browser that looks the same as Chrome but doesn’t work with Google’s sites is better.
i think it's mainly the list maintainers staying on-the-ball with changes to sites. they can move quicker than a giant corporation can develop, test, and roll-out potentially site-breaking changes that could adversely affect 'billions' of users.
Firefox currently enjoys protection from being “relatively niche” in the browser market (aka not Chromium based trash).
But if I had to place a bet on which browser would put effort in to protecting your privacy, including which extensions are installed, my bet would be on Firefox over Chrome.
It doesn’t matter if YouTube can detect uBlock. The great thing about uBlock is you can just block the anti-adblock script. Since Javascript is executed on the user’s computer, it’s trivial to just tell your computer to ignore it. And moving it to server side would cost them too much money in processing power.
That’s why they want everyone to adopt their DRM, so they don’t have to worry about it.
This logic is so flawed lol. It’s also completely trivial for them to detect when their anti-adblock script has been blocked. If it gets blocked, then they can just stop serving you videos.
There are websites that already do this; it’s not theoretical. The website just doesn’t work if it detects an adblocker.
Didn’t Spotify do this a while back, they made threats of account bans as well. In the end it was bypassed and you can still use Adblock in the browser or adfree clients on desktop (or just block ads across device with Adguard or Portmaster), though honestly Spotify kind of sucks in my opinion (usually doesn’t have the music I want and has UI unresponsiveness).
The only one that kind of worked was Twitch, and the Alternative Player plugin for Firefox still bypasses the ads, you just have to wait while Twitch thinks the ad is playing because they inject it into the stream directly and you can’t access the stream without waiting out the timer.
OK, show us an example. I’ve never run across a website that adblockers just didn’t work on, but maybe you know of one. Give us an example, and we’ll see if we can bypass that. Then we’ll know which of us understands how Javascript works, and which doesn’t.
It has always been my understanding that uBlock and uBlock Origin were two totally different extensions for ad blocking. Is this not correct? Back several year ago when ad blockers were new, I recall seeing two different Firefox listings for them, and people would caution users to get uBlock Origin and not the other truncated named one
Yes, it is metamorphical lol. Gorhill is the creator of both uBlock and uBlock Origin. However, he gave the uBlock github repo to another dev, who sold it to adblock plus. Do not download uBlock.
However, he did fork uBlock and continued to develop his own version, now named uBlock Origin. Do download uBlock Origin.
Just another Firefox fan boy. They do this shit when as blockers get brought up too as if Brave, Vivaldi, etc isn’t going to strip out the ad blocker nonsense when they build their versions. Just because these versions use Chromium as a base in no way means they have to use their code. Firefox fan boys are too busy talking about Firefox to understand this.
and uBlock Origin can literally work its magic because firefox provides the necessary APIs that allows it to work. (old ref. but AFAIK still relevant: github.com/…/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox)
At the moment WEI has been rejected by mozilla, so it wont be implemented into firefox. if google decides to add it into chrome and to their services, they will effectively lock out all firefox users. - A very anarchistic part of me actually would like to see how that would play out … but at the moment i am unsure if google would actually dare doing this, but i guess, it will only be a matter of time and we’ll find out.
Not sure if this move would actually damage the open web … since basically google would single itself out as the enemy … and i dont see many users appreciating such a move.
But if the worst happens and the whole web follows googles example, i guess we can just call this iteration of a “open web” a failure and start over with something much simpler … maybe something like the gemini protocol as its base, which isnt polluted with clientside javascript garbage and bloated CSS/XHTML parsers and rendering engines .
With streaming media they created this tiny DRM blob (you might have have heard of widevine.drm) which every browser needs to have to decode certain types of streaming media. Now imagine if something like that would be required … the website would only be loaded and rendered if the module would “validate” that nothing has been tampered with (think: signing and checksum validations). - Suddenly no more content filtering/adblocking or maybe just enhancing websites with userscripts. That is the web google is trying to create. Totally under their control and static. The user will again just like with television be a receiver without any influence. I personally find this to be a very scary, degrading and sad thought so much … that i would likely turn my back on this kind of web as much as possible and look for other networks (maybe something like i2p, gemini , … )
With chromes marketshare, they basically already have one half of the keys. If they can get a significant amount the server/backend owners to adopt/use their “features” (maybe lie like they tried with MV3 that it’s all about security and keeping bad actors out) … it’s game over.
Purge and update your filter cache, check to make sure you have Anti-adblock filters enabled. If that doesn’t work do some troubleshooting with the extensions, one user found that other extensions were interfering and after disabling the problematic extension it worked.
All the arguments about tipping here are missing the point. The restaurant owner just came up with a bullshit way of raising the prices without showing larger numbers on the menu. That should honestly be illegal.
maybe it’s to allow take-away at a lower price, like a dine in vs eat out charge.
Very rare, I’m from Ireland & have only seen it once in a Chinese restaurant. They were very clear about it in the menu though so it wasn’t a sticker shock price
Reading the article, I’m not feeling too encouraged that this will actually impact small restaurants. From the article it sounds like the FTC is just going after large corporations.
The FTC is going to write a rule similar to what local governments have given themselves power to regulate. The article gave some examples, but it is not exhaustive.
I’m not generally in favor of obeying rules but enforcing them on 2+ tons of metal that people drive around is kinda where I start being in favor. With large dangerous objects should come some semblance of responsibility and social demand.
Or if we’re shitposting, every one of those cars contains at least 10k in scrap metal.
If they’re just enforcing speeding rules, then I’m all for it. But something tells me the speed limit enforcement is an ancillary side effect of them keeping a record of every car that passes the thing and when.
It in incentivizes lowering speed limits below what the actual reasonable speed is for an area to increase profits. There are literally speed trap towns where their largest revenue stream comes from their speed traps.
Funny that you would use an article about cops writing tickets to argue that speed cameras are bad. We all agree that speed traps suck and are wrong, but nothing in your article is about the topic, unattended speed cameras, and it mentions nothing of them doing anything shady, outside of aggressive enforcement.
In California speed limits are set by survey to the 85th percentile of speeds. I think it’s a decent approach, it means the vast majority of people are driving at this speed.
they sometimes do but the kinds of accidents they create are less dangerous - approx half of deaths from running reds are pedestrians/cyclists and run red collisions are often T-bone collisisions etc whereas rear ending people from not running lights is usually a front to back collision, which is significantly safer for all parties.
So if there is any pedestrian traffic at all or high traffic in both directions then photo enforced intersections are still a good tradeoff.
One major problem is that the incentive of increasing income from tickets causes authorities to shorten the time the yellow light is visible, meaning that drivers have less time to react and run a larger risk of actually running a red light and entering those dangerous situations you mentioned.
One way of dealing with this would be to ensure that the ones receiving the money are not the same ones issuing the punishment.
All the cool thieves know stealing catalytic converters for the platinum in them is the way to go. Way easier than hauling away multiple tons of scrap metal.
Or if we’re shitposting, every one of those cars contains at least 10k in scrap metal.
From what I’ve heard from folks who have had worn out beaters with no miles left in them crushed, its like a $500-1000 in scrap metal, so not as bad as you might think actually
When I quit at McDonalds to start a career in welding, the owner of the store happened to be visiting. He took me aside and told me “You know, those guys at… (Sorry, what was that place called again? Right…) You know, I’ve heard the people there aren’t as nice as we are here. Are you sure you want to leave?”
I’ve never wanted to punch an old man so much in my life. In that moment, he was the personification of class warfare to me, trying to “trick” me into throwing away my future just so he could have more cheap labour. And the fact it was so blatantly obvious added insult to, well… insult.
Anyway, it’s not the same, but the “wallpapers” thing definitely gives me the same vibes, lol.
It really is the same thing though. It’s out of touch, insulting, and downright disrespectful to use something that is not unique to the provider, or valuable at all, as a reason to stay with said provider.
When I quit my supermarket job after getting my accounting degree my manager tried to convince me to stay, saying they had plans to promote me into management and eventually I could work my way into a head office position.
Umm, no thanks, I think I’ll take the job that I’ve been working towards getting for years.
Don’t forget “This file has already been downloaded, do you want to download it again?”
And the options are to cancel or download again but you can’t open the already existing file from the prompt, so you might as well just download that fucking PDF for the fifth time since it’s not as if you knew where the bloody thing’s been downloaded anyway!
Thanks, it works! Funny how that’s an option considering it downloads files without asking anything the first first time and only ask for your input if you try to download it a second time…
It links to a file with that name. There have been times where I download a pdf and click the name only for my phone to open a different pdf than the one I was supposed to be downloading. Turns out they both had the same name.
It makes sense. I don’t think it’s possible to detect if the contents in two file are identical before downloading it, so all it can do is to compare the file name.
Anyway, the dialogue could be more helpful in this regard, but I guess that would also annoy or confuse some users.
I don’t know what setting you’ve accidentally turned on, but all my browser downloads go to my Downloads folder by default. I’ll admit in-app downloads can end up in a few different spots, though. Most in-app picture downloads end up either in Downloads or in a subfolder inside the Pictures folder, though.
Each application can have its own default download location. Reddit apps were particularly bad about that and it may have carried over into lemmy as well. But learning the settings for the software you want to use isn’t a terrible ask.
Yeah, where I’ve got a shit load of files that, the first time, automatically download with their default name which is usually a bunch of random letters.pdf, it’s quicker to just download it again than to find it!
DCIM probably. While my stuff is in Media, because pictures and videos are always a mixed bag anyway. OpenCamera allows changing the save path, luckily; Media/Camera
Some apps save to their internal storage; /data/data/funny.app.name or /storage/emulated/0/Android/funny.appp.name. It would be funny if not for wanting to cry.
Btw, why not just mount internal storage to /Internal, user home /storage/emulated/0 to /home/<name> and external to /sdcard1 /sdcard2 /otg, @google?
Well, if you don't pay with money, you're paying with your attention. Do you think they create this huge service just for funsies?
Tbf, out of all media streaming services across movies, series, and music, Spotify has the highes bang-for-your-buck. It's still like Netflix at that time when there was only Netflix and you could watch almost everything on one platform. I still buy records that I like on physical media like vinyl, but Spotify is such a great deal for convenient listening to all music out there.
Nope, fuck em. Like why pay for any of this bullshit when I can just steal and/or scrape for it?
Edit: these companies have made enough money and the enshittification won’t stop, I don’t give a shit about their profits. It’s fuck them for life.
Edit 2: and of course it’s two kbin users sucking big corpo’s dick. “I don’t mind being a paypig for these services” well good for you. Mfs is broke around here and spent our last on IT cert study materials and exam vouchers. I’m getting it how I live.
You’re not hurting the companies, you’re hurting the artists. I’m not saying don’t pirate at all, especially from artists like Taylor swift. But maybe if you’re listening to a small artist, especially if they’re independent, consider buying their cd.
There is still a difference between basically nothing and literally nothing. Spotify is better than pirating and CDs/vinyl/digital directly from them is better than Spotify.
That tracks. Every artist who spoke to me about this (I’m kind of a hobby musician) told me a) fuck labels, not worth it, b) Promotion is 95% of the game and you have to master it yourself, c) no money in Spotify except for the top .1% or so percent, the money always comes from gigs or shows so starting live early is a good idea.
hey now I make 10 bucks a year from streaming royalties. I can almost buy a fancy coffee with a shot of booze for that. Oh the life of an indie music artist.
The last album I bought was Ty Segal's latest. I have seen him live at least a dozen times and bought roughly $600 worth of limited releases and shirts at these shows. I "discovered" him thru Spotify's Discover Weekly playlist that automatically puts together music they think I will like.
I think all the free users are the problem. They don't want to pay for the service, they complain about ticket and merch prices at shows and hardly contribute anything to the artists themselves. They blame Spotify when it's Ticketmaster and the labels they should direct their anger towards. Not paying users like me.
According to this blogpost or whatever it is Spotify basically doesn’t pay artists, so if there’s a niche/local/whatever band you like, the best way to show support is by buying their tracks/records directly from them.
I think for smaller artists, Spotify is less for revenue and more for exposure, hoping that your music can reach new listeners.
(kinda meme kinda serious, as I know nobody who hears an artist on a streaming service and then does anything past listen to them on said streaming service, netting the artist effectively nothing)
know nobody who hears an artist on a streaming service and then does anything past listen to them on said streaming service
Please allow me to introduce myself lol.
I go to live shows pretty frequently, maybe every two months or so, and my first exposure to many of the artists I've seen came from a random Spotify recommendation. I don't think this kind of thing is particularly uncommon among people who go to shows frequently. If I don't learn about them from Spotify, I heard about them from a friend or online community that was listening to them. Music really moves through social networks, so exposure can have some real value, though I agree it's rather cruel to literally not pay an artist and simply tell them they're getting exposure.
But hey, if exposure truly was worthless, advertising wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar industry.
I have the same experience. It's not like I'm on tick tock or watching MTV to find new artists. I deep dive thru the artists I already like and find them that way. It's expanded what I listen too compared to my dad who is still stuck in the 70s
I get your point but it really depends on the audience you're looking at. Personally, I use Spotify a lot to listen to any new artist I can find and check their stuff out without crawling a) youtube or b) buying their records in advance. If I stumble upon some stuff that I'm really into, I look if there are any vinyls available. (Bonus step c): you're two months late to the vinyl release and the discocks are already hoarding all copies, smh.)
The point you've made kinda boils down to the question if music is a hobby or a commodity for said person. The "problem" I'm seeing is that music is more of a commodity to many people that just listen to stuff for the sake of listening to it. That's just a product of changing times and the relation between people and music and the distributors inbetween reflects that. Of course this is frustrating for the load of talented artists that just niche audiences care about.
Spotify is not actually profitable, not that I imagine you actually care about discussing such annoyances as facts. I imagine you probably wouldn't personally love the idea of working while actively losing money for the privilege?
I guess Kbin is getting a reputation for having such wild takes as "Stealing isn't exactly great," so I'm glad to see I chose a Fediverse home wisely.
If your definition of resisting capitalism is apparently "not paying for things that other people provide for you", I think that says more about you than it really says about economics.
To then call me the self-centered one is actual comedy, so thanks for that laugh.
Man these people forget the days when a month of Spotify would afford you 1 CD. I remember cause I would spend half my paycheck on music. I'm just sitting here happy for services like Spotify and YouTube in my life. I remember a time when music and information was much harder to obtain (even illegally).
But if you bought the CD you actually owned something. Stop paying for the services and you have nothing if all you used was spotify/YouTube/pandora. I gave up on paying for streaming years ago and spend the same amount monthly on purchasing music. I get CDs, either new or used. I’ve amassed a collection and I don’t need Internet or monthly charges to play them.
We all have our preferences and I enjoy the quantity of music I can get in a heartbeat. It really sucked when you were 16 and spent $15 on a CD that sucked because there was no way to hear it ahead of time.
My rule was always “buy it if there are at least 3 songs I know & like”. Only really had a few disappoint. I used to hang out at used CD stores though. I got so many for $2.50 or $5. Even a few gems for $1.
But I don’t want to own it. I don’t want to amass a collection of CDs taking up space somewhere. Been there, done that. I have a large collection of ripped mp3s from CDs I bought in the 90s and early 2000s (I’ve long since disposed of the physical media). I haven’t clicked on a single one of them in years, I just keep them for nostalgia sake and because they take relatively little space.
I just occasionally want to listen to music sans commercials or annoying DJs wasting my time. For the cost of 1 CD a month my entire family can listen to almost anything they desire, at any time, without hassles (on Pandora in our case but I assume the economics are similar).
Same thing with movies, honestly. I watch them once and move on. There’s a small handful I like enough to rewatch and I do own those.
I get the whole, we don’t own anything anymore, argument and I mostly agree with it (see my massive Steam library). I just want both options to be viable. Streaming for ephemeral entertainment and actual ownership for the things I choose to keep.
Valid point, but commuting with my turntable to listen to my sick vinyls on the go is a pain in the ass. Also moving sucks ass when you have a metric fuckton of sensitive vinyl to move. Owning stuff also has its downsides. Also no way I'm digitizing my vinyls and cutting them and shit to listen to them on the go, ain't nobody got time fo dat.
I gave up on CDs roughly 15 years ago because I don't like the format compared to vinyl (small album art, plasticy jewelcases, ...).
I feel you, the value from Spotify is enormous. I can sift through ten different bands in no time just because I decided that I want to look up a new genre that I may or may not be totally into by the end.
You owned the music when you buy it. With multiple backups the risks of losing it it very minimal but with spotify or other streaming services, if you have to reduce your expenses you completely lose the access to the music till you pay again. Spotify always grey out songs too so even when you pay you may not have access to the some of the music you want to listen to
I was 16 before Napster existed. It didn't come out til I was 19. You guys are so ignorant and self centered. Claim you care about the artists but you want it all for free and when Spotify makes things difficult on you your solution is to pirate everything. We pirated when music was far more expensive than it was now. Software cost $1000s and there wasn't a $60 monthly option. People actually lived on minimum wage back then and it was $4.25/hr.
Spotify is not profitable nor ever has been. It accrued $4B in additional debt last year. The business is subject to high royalty fees. As a competitor, I just leave free Spotify running all day on mute since they lose money from every subscriber. The royalties are the same whether they make money or not on the customer. It is wise of them to more aggressively convert people to paid plans, but I’m sure that their margins are razor thin.
Not sure why my comment was deleted, but no. I work for a corporate competitor or them. Spotify is a public company, so it is plain to see that they are not profitable and have never been.
Yeah don't use it if you don't want to, idc. But you might accept the thought that there are people that think the deal Spotify puts on the table is good.
I know not everyone will agree, but I think YouTube premium is the better bang-for-buck service. $3 more per month than Spotify and includes YouTube Music premium and YouTube Premium. So all the music and ad-free YouTube.
Only so long as Google decides to continue serving content for free to people who contribute nothing to their bottom line, which isn't guaranteed to last.
Ultimately, there's no real way to get around the fact that operating huge platforms like YouTube that serve hundreds of millions of people every day comes with very significant costs, and someone has to pay them. Either users pay them directly, advertisers pay them in exchange for ad space, or investors pay them in exchange for the ability to control the platform for whatever purpose they want.
Given that, I'm personally pretty happy to settle on direct subscription fees. For the sheer amount of content you get, I don't think it's really that unreasonable, though I am of course speaking as someone in a position where I can afford them.
An argument could easily be made for Spotify as well. There are plenty of options for streaming music for free to your device with download support. Just about anything can be done for free if people are willing.
Surprising to see any suggestions on here for YouTube Premium. I have been lucky enough to be on a family plan for years and it’s honestly great. Sometimes, it’s just easier not to deal with having to hack around things to make them usable.
I’m currently in a three month trial due to the value (music streaming and ad free you tube), but coming from Pandora YT Music’s radio algorithm sucks sooooo bad. One of my first plays was a foo fighters album and now all the stations I create have alt/grunge in them. It’s making it really hard to consider staying.
I did not agree when I had both premium, I did not agree when I had YT light and Spotify premium, and I do not agree today.
Context: I only use YT for its main service; streaming video. I never tried YT music because I already had music streaming set up in a way that worked for me.
I’d rather vote for Deezer. Costs the same, but you also get lossless (16-bit 44.1kHz FLAC) audio.
By the way, free-mp3-download.net rips songs from Deezer. And if you don’t like spending storage, you could self-host your own Navidrome server, though I get that may not be convenient.
You don’t actually need to be aware of it. Because you said you were aware of it, when you clicked Accept on the EULA, and on page 62 of the EULA it said they have the right to disable your printer remotely at any time and for any reason.
In decent nations, an EULA is considered an attempt by the seller to, after the purchase, change the terms of the implicit contract which was the sale, so it’s has no legal standing whatsoever.
Absolutelly, the seller can set contract terms before the sale is done (and even then there are lots of limitations to avoid things like bait & switch, so it usualy has to be pretty clear and upfront and there are certain rights that a retail buyer simply cannot loose, even contractually), but never after the sale has been done.
EULAs only have legal standing in a few places, including a few States in the US.
EULAs can very well be legal when you can read tgem before you purchase. Though German courts somewhat assume that nobody reads them, which becomes relevant if somebody puts something very unexpected in there. I would expect that they somehow disable only the ink, not the whole printer. Apparently thi also makes buying used printers a mess.
When ever I am forced to sign something (like some contract addendum for my job) I write that I don’t understand anything on that paper, or now I write it in email before e-signing.
It should be. But you agreed to it. Gotta print out that child support declaration in 20 minutes before your lawyer has to go to court? Hey fuck you consumer. Have a medical emergency and need to print something to save a patient? Fuck you consumer.
Someone should sue them for everything they are. Because they are thieves of the highest order.
When does an agreement become null and void when the knowledge and time needed to understand the terms, and especially whether they even stand in the various jurisdictions, is simply unfeasible for a layperson to be expected to possess?
In a similar vein, if an agreement requires a lawyer on call/retainer to interpret, what court besides a bought court would possibly uphold such a standard?
Fwiw I’m not asking this with the expectation of you personally having the answers, but to further highlight the absurdity of many of these so-called agreements.
EULAs and TOSs have been tossed out in court before under the logic that you need to understand an agreement for it to be legally binding and that not reading the agreement inherently prevents you from understanding it.
Wikipedia has an overview and their enforceability varies pretty dramatically across the US (which is why many such agreements attempt to specify which states or courts they must be litigated against in).
In most of the World EULAs have no legal standing whatsoever because they’re an attempt by the seller to after the sale change the terms of the sale.
It’s mainly in the US that those things aren’t instantly dismissed by the court as legally meaningless, but then again the US is way less consumer friendly that, for example, pretty much all of Europe.
They only removed it because it interfered with a new feature they added to the mobile app. If they removed it for monetary reasons (like what they did with dislikes), they wouldn’t have brought it back
Having paid time off on paper doesn’t mean you have it in practice, as anyone who’s worked food service can tell you. Blaming the guy who had to stay in a low wage job for decades for his kids’ health insurance instead of the corporation that fosters an environment where people are discouraged from or punished for calling out is missing the forest for the trees.
I’ve gone 5 years in a row without getting sick. I met this electrician that claimed he didn’t get sick for the last 30 years. We don’t actually know how many times this dude was sick.
This is usually how PTO in minimum wage jobs works. “Hey boss can I use a PTO day? I’m sick.” “Just find someone to cover your shift.” Of course nobody volunteers so you go in sick or get fired.
As a european i think its fucking disgusting that sick days in america are substracted from vacation days. Don’t you deserve any vacation because you happen to be sick more often then someone else?
Here in germany, if I geht sick during a vacation, i’ll call work and get back all the vacation days that I happened to be sick, because everyone should use his vacation days to regenerate and relax, not to lie in bed being sick.
Sometimes they are separate allotments. My work combined them at one point, which means they would get more vacation time than before as long as they don’t get sick.
Of course that’s still encouraging people to work while sick.
One of my coworkers just retired and they said she’d never missed a day in 47 years and I had the same reaction. Like, sorry, unless she’s secretly immortal, no fucking way did she go her entire adult life without getting sick even once, so thanks for bringing all your germs in, I guess. Hope the single sentence in the employee newsletter most people don’t read was worth it.
I was with my wife for 12 years before I ever saw her get sick. She would go “I don’t feel good, I’m going to go lay down” and an hour later she’d be all better. She has a crazy good immune system. Granted 12 < 47.
I’ve taken several mental health days in my lifetime of work. I cannot imagine not having that as an option especially when you know you cannot mentally work.
He could also have had the weekend sickness. Happened a couple times with me now that I get sick Friday eve and am recovered 80-90% for Monday. Swear my body holds out on purpose so that I don’t get a day off.
Yep, a huge portion of this recent ‘inflation’ is not cost increases or actual inflation… just basically the wealthy class turning the screws on everyone else because they can.
What’s terribly sad about that is we’re genuinely reaching crisis levels in some cities. These people need housing *with functioning plumbing stat.
I don’t understand people’s hesitance to house them because it’s like… all you people do is complain about them existing and wanting them “out of your downtown.” Well shit, it’s my downtown too and their downtown as well and all I want is for them to be housed, and holy shit that actually solves your whole fucking complaint because now they’re not in “your” downtown.
The amount of human feces that has to be cleaned daily in some cities is genuinely approaching crisis levels. It’s literally a public health emergency. It absolutely can get to the level where enough fecal matter is in a general area that large amounts of bacteria will be floating in the air, and people can end up getting ill from food that this bacteria has landed on. No direct contact with feces needed, once it has reached that level. We don’t want it to reach that level.
There’s my rant about how absolutely fucked the homeless situation is, because its inhumane and should be classified as “cruel and unusual punishment” in my opinion.
The issue is indeed fucked, but imma NIMBY this one.
Nuclear reactor in my backyard? Go for it, I understand the risks, and lack thereof. Prison? Fine by me.
Homeless people in my hood? Hard no. And anyone says different hasn’t known or been around homeless people. Only time I consistently carry a pistol is downtown. I’d be hard pressed to pull it, but still…
Many, many are blameless. But fuck me. If you can’t figure out a way to get a roof over your head in America, you’re kind of a fuck up. And I know that statement will piss people off, but if pissed off, how many homeless have you personally known? They’re almost all fuck ups, and not the kind you want around your home.
And yes, I’ve been that desperate, that out of options. Spent a night or two in the woods and under a bridge. Jail would be far preferable. And some take that option.
It’s clearly cheaper to just provide housing. But where?! Are we going to build concentration camps in the boondocks? And not my boondocks thank you very much. I approach my camp every weekend with a pistol in hand for two reasons; 2 or 4-legged crazy animals have set up camp and think it’s theirs.
Mental health care? Again, have you ever met or personally known homeless folks? They will NOT willingly go for help. I got stories. We going to force them into hospitals? Hell, if so, let’s just cut to the chase and build concentration camps.
Lotta sick people walking the streets. And I ain’t got answers. And if anyone gives you a simple answer? That person is ignorant at best, or more probably an asshole.
Best I got for Americans? Some sort of universal health care. Devil and details and all, but my ex-wife, while training in the hood for her RN, talked of men throwing themselves in front of cars on freezing nights. Free ride to the ER. Yeah. We’re that fucked up.
I seriously don’t think you do, here is a definition.
the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
Continuous use of irony eventually makes the person communicate the idea unironically. Be careful with how often you are spouting this before you start believing it.
“Actual inflation” is just some capitalist a bit further up the supply chain “turning the screws on everyone just because they can”. Inflation is the ultimate proof capitalism is an inherently flawed system.
This is just false. The OP had the correct idea, demand for essential goods is inelastic. This doesn’t go away if you “get rid of capitalism”. All economies have price increases. If you ban them, you just get shortages and things get sold on the black market (as was the case in the Soviet Union).
The real issue is: what is “essential”? The items we think of as essential are mostly conveniences. Disposable diapers are not essential. Washable diapers existed for thousands of years, and they are way better for the environment. Your kids don’t have disposable clothes. You just wash them when they are covered in vomit or feces. So why not diapers?
Maybe we should consider alternatives to “essential” items. Toilet paper is expensive? Get a bidet. Baked goods are expensive? Get some butter and flour. Beer is expensive? Good news: alcohol just appears for free when you give yeast food! Your home repairs are expensive? Literally watch a YouTube video.
It’s easier than ever to do things on your own. Don’t hand out money unless you want to. And realize the choice you are making.
Sure in a perfect world we all the time and money to install a bidet, or bake everything you need, or brew beer, most people don’t have the time and or money to experiment with this kind of stuff.
You got solid points about time and money spent, but it’s not all like that and OP has points as well.
A bidet is $20-$30. My Filipina wife asked for one, and rejected the nicer units I wanted to buy. Busted out all the tools, which some may not have, only needed simple pliers to get the old fitting loose. Rest was done by hand in 10-minutes, tested and working.
Now how much you spending on toilet paper again?
I know we can’t all grow our own food, but some things are worth looking into.
Another one; My fridge is failing. Pretty sure it’s a worn fan, but I’m clueless. As OP said, find a YouTube video. Frustrating? Good, you’re learning.
I’ve had my AC fail a few times. It was a $20 capacitor in every case, took 45-minutes to figure out the first time. 10-minute fix now.
How much was hiring a pro to come to your house?
Hell, maybe you even got some tools you didn’t end up needing, but those are yours forever.
Of course I’m not bashing the thought of DIY but, as we have all seen the effect of “handyman specials”. There is good and bad, but sometimes, and for many people they have neither the time or money, that’s all.
Inflation doesn’t come from demand, it comes from someone raising the price of something - a raw material or a finished product. The combined effect of all those pricing hikes is what we call “inflation”, and they are almost always done in the name of increasing profit, not to meet demand (whether elastic or not). A system that demands infinite growth cannot work in a finite world, that’s the problem at the root of capitalism.
Washable diapers are somewhat different from regular clothes. They need to be natural fibre (cotton or similar) that can handle being washed at high temperatures - because you want to make sure those diapers are properly clean. Natural fibre is expensive - there is a reason why most denim pants on the market are stretch now. Washable diapers also harken back to a time when one parent - usually the mother - was at home all day to look after the household and the kids. Water and electricity were cheap back then - nowadays if you’re running several loads of washing each week just to clean the diapers, you’re quickly transferring that cost.
Your other analogies are similarly flawed. Home repairs are expensive, sure - but watch a Youtube video? Really? For one, some skillsets are not transferrable through a video - these people make it look easy because they know what they’re doing. Then, even if I can comprehend what I’m supposed to do, I still may not have the required tools - and boy some of them can be expensive. Thirdly, certain kinds of work are regulated, at least where I live (plumbing, electrical), so DIYing those can get you into very hot water if something goes wrong. Lastly, if I botch a repair or break something else in the process, I’m left holding the bag. A tradesman has the required insurance - at least where I live - and has to warrant their work.
You think cotton is expensive? And you think electricity and water were cheaper? None of that is true. I actually looked up what a load of laundry costs in terms of energy and water. It’s about a kWh to wash and another to dry. Water is maybe a dollar per wash.
So $1.50 per wash and dry at most for a couple dozen new diapers. And you forget the best part: you never run out! So you save time by not needing to go to the store.
If you think doing your own repairs is impossible to “comprehend”, I don’t know what to tell you. You may currently live in a house built by illiterate people. And I mean that, literally. Most repairs are very approachable with just a screwdriver and a wrench. You probably have the tools already (or $10 to buy them).
I don’t know what you class as ‘repairs’ if you think ‘most’ of them can be done with a screwdriver and a wrench. I do plenty of DIY and repair work on my house, and have invested in a number of tools, some of which would be completely out of range or over the top for an average family. I’ve had to teach myself some plumbing skills to fix drainpipes and other stuff - screwdriver and wrench get you exactly nowhere with that kind of stuff.
Also, I’ve watched more than enough Youtube DIY videos to know that many of them contain incomplete and misleading instructions, and that some of the people who make them are idiots.
Are we going to pretend inflation isn’t also being driven by people acting cavalier? Because non essential spending is still way up last time I checked. People don’t seem to be objecting to the prices at all where it counts.
Are we going to pretend inflation isn’t also being driven by people acting cavalier?
Yes, because inflation is not driven by people spending money. Spending money drives the economy. Inflation means the prices of goods and services are going up. That is driven by scarcity of resources, scarcity of goods, workforce shortages, and more often than not, pure greed.
If you’re arguing that prices are going up because businesses think people have too much money to spend, and want a bigger piece of the pie, then you’ve literally restated the original point of this thread.
Don’t worry, my Econ 101 class states that surely a competitor will come in and operate at a lower cost to recoup that cost for the customers!
Wait… what do you mean the competitors are all increasing prices by the same amount knowing demand for diapers is inelastic and the Nash equilibrium is for them to all match price increases so that they all make more money together?
Surely a new entrant will help!
Wait… what do you mean nobody will invest in a new competitor because the market is “saturated” and even if they did the big brands would just decrease prices in the areas they operate until they run out of cash and fold?
Surely a regulator will help!
Wait… what do you mean the regulators feel price increases are due to “too much demand” for products and are turning the screws on consumers?
I usually try to see both sides of an argument, give 'em a chance.
For example; Supply chains were truly fucked over by COVID. And believe it or not, it’s still an issue in late 2023.
But inflation now is almost entirely corporate greed. They saw what they could get away with and pressed it.
Say you have egg laying chickens. You were selling a dozen for $1, but prices spiked and people were happy to pay $2.
You going to drop your prices out the goodness of your heart? And at the same time, feed prices went up (but came down again). Everything went up! Need to repair the fence? $20 worth of wire is now $40 (but that price came down).
That extra $20 was nothing to me, but I can justify keeping my prices up, or even raising them!
Expand that to megacorp’s kinda thinking. In my simplistic case, you are solely responsible for the morality of your decisions, and it might be a hard decision. You gonna take less money nice guy?
For a monster corporation? Nah, that greed is spread over a thousand actors, all sanely acting in their best interest.
Capitalism is the best economic system we got, but the flaws are clear. We need strong worker unions and strong legislative oversight. And that is clear as well.
That’s the basis for my claim actually. The other position has a date not the word “present”. Which I now realize includes 2023 not this year, so I don’t know what the original question was getting at.
I’m curious if it could solve the traffic light and crosswalk ones, I would try but I’m out of free image uploads from asking it to explain memes to test its cultural knowledge.
Expl-AI-n itself is a pun. With the letters AI in the word explain capitalized, readers can infer that artificial intelligence is being used to explain jokes.
Man the models can’t store verbatim its training data, the amount of data is turned into a model that is hundreds or thousands of times smaller than the original source data. If it was capable of simply recovering everything that it was trained on this would be some magical compression algorithm and that by itself would be extremely impressive.
Oh ok, you want to claim this is compressing the entirety of the internet in a model that isn’t even 1 terabyte of data and be unimpressed that is something.
But it isn’t compression. It is a mathematical fact that neural networks are universal function approximators, this is undisputed, and analytic functions are continuous so to be an analytical function approximator it must be able to fill in the gaps between discrete data points by itself, which necessarily means spiting out data outside of the input distribution, data it has not seen.
Not sure why you feel the need to put words in my mouth. It wasn’t trained on “the entirety of the Internet,” but rather less than a terabyte of it. So yeah, that would probably take up less than a terabyte.
Arguing over this is just dumb, you can yourself take any picture you want at this very moment or come up with a brand new meme template on the spot and upload it to ChatGPT to see you are wrong, it is free btw.
It is a partial analogy, it takes into consideration the outputs which are related to some specific training data and disconsiders the outputs which cannot be directly related to any specific training data.
For example, make up a new meme template and a new joke on the spot, it couldn’t have seen it before if you make sure your joke and template are new. If the AI can explain it then compression is a horrendous analogy.
Lossy compression explains outputs being similar but not identical when trying to recover the original data, it doesn’t explain brand new content that makes sense standalone. Imagine a lossy audio compression resulting in a brand new song midway through playback, or a lossy image compression resulting in a brand new coherent image being overlayed onto some pixels of the original image. That is not what happens, lossy audio compression results in noise, lossy image compression results in noise, not in coherent unheard songs and unseen images.
They do not store anything verbatim; They instead store the directions in which various words and related concepts relate to one another in some gigantic multidimensional space.
I highly suggest you go learn what they actually do before you continue talking out of your ass about them
You said it matches text to it’s training data, which it does not do.
Your single-phrase statement only works for very short, non-repetitive phrases. As soon as your phrase repeats a token more than a few times, the statistics for the tokens change and could result in nonsensical output that repeats through subsections of the training data.
And even then for that single non-repetitive phrases, the reason you would get that single phrase back is not because it would be “matching on” the phrase. It is because the token weights would effectively encode that the statistical likelihood of the “next token” in the generated output is 100% for a given token when the evaluated token precedes it in the training phrase. Or in other words: Your training data being a single phrase maniplates the statistics so that the most likely output is that single phrase.
However, that is a far cry from simple “matching” against the training data. Which is what you said it does.
Analysis. It uses it, but not by “matching it”. The training data is not included in the final model. No GPT can access its training data at runtime.
Training analyzes the contents of the training data and creates a statistical model representing the likelihoods of various tokens based on a complex series of mathematical transformations that encode various attributes of the tokens making up the training data.
3Blue1Brown has a great series on the actual math behind it, I would highly recommend educating yourself on what GPTs actually do. It’s way more interesting than simple matching.
The majority of people right now are fairly out of touch with the actual capabilities of modern models.
There’s a combination of the tech learning curve on the human side as well as an amplification of stories about the 0.5% most extreme failure conditions by a press core desperate to feature how shitty the technology they are terrified of taking their jobs is.
There’s some wild stuff most people just haven’t seen.
At the risk of sounding like a tech bro who’s desperately trying to secure funding: this truly does feel like a major leap in technology that is going to change the world.
Anytime I hear it dismissed as “basically auto-complete”, I feel like it’s being underestimated.
Its kind of funny because autocomplete on phones is definitely moving in the direction of using LLMs. Its like it wasn’t true when people started saying it, but it will be literally true in a couple of years at most.
It’s not just underestimation, it’s outright misinformation.
There’s so much research by this point over the past 18 months that there’s an incredible amount going on beyond “it’s just a Markov chain, bro.”
It was never a Markov chain as that ignored the self-attention mechanism which violated the Markov property. It was just some people trying to explain it used a simplified description which went viral.
Sometimes talking to people who think it’s crap feels like talking to antivaxxers. The feelings matter more than the research and evidence.
I can just as well say that the screenshot above is the top 0.5% pushed by people trying to sell the tech. I don’t really have an opinion either way tbh, I’m just being cynical. But my own experience with those tools hasn’t been impressive.
At a pretrained layer, the model is literally a combination of a normal distribution curve of capabilities.
It can autocomplete a flat earther as much as a Nobel physicist given sufficient context.
So it makes sense that even after the fine tuning efforts there’d be a distribution in people’s experiences with the tools.
But just as the average person’s output from Photoshop isn’t going to be very impressive, if all you ever really see is bad Photoshops and average use, you might think it’s a crappy tool.
There’s a learning curve to the model usage, and even in just a year of research the difference between capabilities of the exact same model from then to now is drastically different, based only on learnings around better usage.
The problem is the base models are improving so quickly the best practices for the old generation of models goes out the window with the new. So even if there were classes available I wouldn’t bother pointing you to them as you’d just be picking up info obsolete by the time the classes finished or shortly thereafter.
I’d just strongly caution against betting against the tech’s continued capabilities and improvements if you don’t want to be surprised and haven’t taken the time to look into them operating at their best.
The OP post is pretty crap compared to the top 0.5% usage.
It really does depend on what you ask and how, I can get some really nice music recommendations from Chatgpt but it also cannot comprehend GURPS skill rules, it’s actually funny how it manages to get it wrong a completely different way each time
Yes it probably can… CAPTCHAs don’t work based on your answers (many types you can answer wrong and still sometimes pass) - they work by tracking your mouses movements and timing and deciding whether they human-like.
I’m stubborn. I refuse to give the machine the answer I know it wants. And no, that overpass is not a bridge. Usually there is an option to skip or verify another way, This is when the captcha drops the ruse and it’s clear that the machine was just analyzing my mouse movements and response timings anyway to verify that I was behaving randomly in a human way. Still a better game than any of those in YouTube ads.
I don’t remember actually but I checked the file metadata and I have the template in my downloads folder next to this which has an exif tag of 2 minutes later with gimp metadata so I’m pretty sure I must have made it, which makes it a bit more impressive since I probably just sent it to friends privately and didn’t post it anywhere it could have been scraped for training.
lemmy.world
Top