There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

stonerboner

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

stonerboner ,

Sounds interesting! May I ask where the data used to train came from?

stonerboner ,

Thanks for clarifying. Cool project! I’ve been looking for a guilt free LLM that sourced its training data in an ethical way. Tell me if I’m way off base, but I take it your app is to the LLMs similar to how the Ice Cubes is an interface for the fediverse. Nice!

I wish you well with your project. If any of the models you work with fit what I’m looking for, or you know of any such models please let me know!

stonerboner ,

Omg stop being so reactionary. It’s obviously a case of pregnant shaming, unless you just casually call pregnant people fat.

A little offended you just assumed it was fat hate and not pregnancy hate

Top EU Court Says There’s No Right To Online Anonymity, Because Copyright Is More Important (www.techdirt.com)

The key problem is that copyright infringement by a private individual is regarded by the court as something so serious that it negates the right to privacy. It’s a sign of the twisted values that copyright has succeeded on imposing on many legal systems. It equates the mere copying of a digital file with serious crimes that...

stonerboner ,

Copyright sure was useful for all the artists who had their creations scraped from the “open web,” huh (I am in this bucket). It would literally bankrupt me to enforce it.

Copyright only serves the wealthy, and rarely if ever protects I normal individuals who are well enough off to afford legal remedy. This is due to the cost to enforce, which is beyond most creators and a drop in the bucket for the wealthy. It is intended to and has been updated consistently to do just that.

We need some kind of protection, but historically copyright ain’t it.

stonerboner ,

Stalking is always a crime, and has a specific legal definition. For the federal level in the US per 18 U.S.C. § 2261A:

The statute specifies that it is illegal to engage in conduct with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, where such conduct:

Places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to: That person;

An immediate family member;

A spouse or intimate partner of that person; or

A pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse of that person; or

Causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to: That person;

An immediate family member;

A spouse or intimate partner of that person; or

A pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse of that person.

Scrolling through their social media is not stalking, unless you plan to harass or harm the person.

stonerboner ,

Implementing a better system would effectively abolish copyright, but I’m pretty sure most people agree with your sentiment.

I’m an edge case where I don’t believe ideas/land/medicine/stars etc can’t or shouldn’t be “owned” by any one entity. It’s not feasible to expect it in practice, of course. But humans love to carve things up and arbitrarily assert ownership. Some traditional Native American ideas on this are the closest to what I’m chipping away at.

stonerboner ,

Yep, I agree. The innocent tiny humanoids that benevolently ride larger humanoid mechs should be compared to this asshole.

stonerboner ,

Cannabis Ruderalis has entered the chat as the third currently recognized species, unique for its auto-flowering quality.

stonerboner ,

Where self-pollinating is where a plant’s pollen fertilizes its own ovules to create seeds, auto-flowering is where the plant transitions from vegetative state to the flowering state based on age instead of light cycle.

Idk it’s so interesting to me

stonerboner ,

Sure you can. It’s a lower THC than some of the other species, but often crossbred with them

stonerboner ,

This. I use LLM for work, primarily to help create extremely complex nested functions.

I don’t count on LLM’s to create anything new for me, or to provide any data points. I provide the logic, and explain exactly what I want in the end.

I take a process which normally takes 45 minutes daily, test it once, and now I have reclaimed 43 extra minutes of my time each day.

It’s easy and safe to test before I apply it to real data.

It’s missed the mark a few times as I learned how to properly work with it, but now I’m consistently getting good results.

Other use cases are up for debate, but I agree when used properly hallucinations are not much of a problem. When I see people complain about them, that tells me they’re using the tool to generate data, which of course is stupid.

stonerboner ,

Originally Spotify started with no users. So they’re not really losing anything if people migrate to another service lmao

stonerboner ,

Apple has many more subscribers than in the USA, but I know Europe uses Spotify more. Being the biggest means they are more top heavy in the market.

But the funny thing is that even with a larger user base, Spotify has NEVER posted a profit (which gets significantly more negative each year). They also have been loosing a substantial percentage of their revenue per user each year as they further enshittify their platform.

They should be VERY concerned about losing users, and taking away features will end up doing just that.

stonerboner ,

Yes I feel the same way about YouTube, and I’m confident many others do as well.

You can pretend that users who trade their time listening to and viewing ads don’t deserve the to be upset with enshittification, but I wholeheartedly disagree. That line of thinking tracks very well with Musk’s approach to X, another service that was the “biggest” but not profitable. Look how they have done moving features behind paywalls and upending the expectations of their user base.

stonerboner ,

Twitter was hardly profitable, but Spotify has never posted a profit. In fact, they are more negative in regard to profit every year. Twitter and Spotify are very similar in that their main success is volume, but not profitability.

I have no doubt Spotify could or would sell and get even worse. Just like Twitter.

People use it BECAUSE it was free and feature rich. When they start taking away the latter to bolster the former, you’ll see a migration to the next best free, feature rich service. I quit Spotify 4 months ago, and I don’t feel like I’m missing out on anything.

stonerboner ,

I switched to Apple Music. It’s not my fav, but the bundle with other apple services made the price right for a family plan.

stonerboner ,

Switching gears to Apple, I had heard of AppleTV but never was aware of the shows. I got it bundled when I switched music apps, and holy shit Ted Lasso and Foundation are amazing. I’m pleasantly surprised with the quality, though it doesn’t have as much content as the other services. But there’s also a lot less bullshit to sift through to find something good.

If you are at all interested, try just a month. You could watch most of the things that interest you in that timeframe most likely.

I’m about a month in and finished out two full series and working on a third.

stonerboner ,

Bullshit. The window shows the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. Reported.

stonerboner ,

I’d counter that basing your livelihood on an app that harvests your and your viewers data for an adversarial government known to use this kind of data in psyops isn’t a sound business idea.

In fact, I’d say this bill actually protects American users who have been using the app.

If TikTok can’t prove that they use our data responsibly, and refuse to do so to the point of just leaving the market, we are all better off. Another company will fill that void and content creators have endless options to move to.

I don’t think “but people need to make money while our data is harvested and provided to a government that uses it against us” is a great argument.

stonerboner ,

You’re extremely dull if youre suggesting I don’t know data is abused left and right all over the place. But if TikTok is so bad it’s can’t even fit within our abusive system, it deserves to transfer or exit.

You’re missing the forest for the trees.

stonerboner ,

No doubt, but accountability starts somewhere, so why have a problem with this? Why not celebrate and then demand equitable action domestically?

“I’m not defending TikTok. I’m just bemoaning action being taken against them because bad things happen with other companies!” Not a great look.

stonerboner ,

I disagree. I listened when it was presented to Congress. I read a good amount of the data justifying the required transfer. If you don’t think this bill protects the public, there really is no reasoning with you.

Someone will get a cut specifically because TikTok chooses not to prove where their data flows. They had a choice, and chose to exit the market.

But sure, you can frame it like we forced them to leave the market, which isn’t the case. They could have verified their data flow and remained if they were not abusing it.

stonerboner ,

It’s almost like an action can protect people and enrich elites at the same time. Explain how the American public isn’t better of keeping their personal data away from the CCP. Interested to see how you think this doesn’t protect the public at all from an adversarial foreign government.

stonerboner ,

Taking longer than it should.

Any other completely unrelated questions you’d like to ask?

stonerboner ,

You can literally watch the congressional hearings yourself.

Here’s one video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhKX8zF2FQw

I watched it live, so I don’t know how complete or edited this recording of the hearing is. Talk to you in 5.5 hours after you watch the thing you requested.

stonerboner ,

It’s almost like TikTok was given a chance to prove our data doesn’t flow to the Chinese government, and TikTok decided to exit the market than prove where their data flows.

But sure, let’s just pretend we randomly forced them out with an executive overreach lmao

stonerboner ,

I bet less than 2% of users use VPNs. They won’t have much content, if any, from domestic creators. They’ll only be interacting with the other 2% of American users along with foriegn content.

I don’t think people with enough brain cells to use VPN will are China’s target demographic, and I don’t think VPN users will constitute a fraction of activity you are suggesting they will.

I really like how you point out the danger of the Cambridge Analytica incident, but then bemoan trying to keep data harvesting away from a foreign adversary.

Domestic data policy drastically needs an overhaul, but we have to start somewhere. Also, Cambridge Analytica had a fucking shitstain president/administration running interference because they benefited directly from it. Glad we have accountability this time around.

stonerboner ,

We could also feed the poor, house the homeless, heal the sick etc. we could ask why any law regarding healthcare, housing, nutrition doesn’t fix the issue, but that’s a whole other can of worms.

The FTC is putting in work this administration, and are poised to bring back Net Neutrality (obligatory Fuck Ajit Pai). This is a huge step towards protecting all Americans, so I think you’re confusing this issue (adversarial governments harvesting our data) with the larger issue of domestic policy (which will be much harder to tackle).

stonerboner ,

What does the issue we are talking about (TikTok’s data harvesting) have to do with healthcare? Unless that’s where you get your magic crystal healing tips lmao

stonerboner ,

The pedantry emanating from you is palpable.

You can just admit that protecting the public comes in many forms and one law won’t fix unrelated areas.

But you won’t, because you have a hate boner for our shitty oligarchy. You can also pretend like TikTok didn’t have a chance to prove they don’t misuse our data, but chose to exit the market rather than reveal where our data goes. The “cut” you bemoan, if it’s even true, would only occur due to TikTok’s choice.

But sure, they only passed a law after giving the company a chance to comply so they could get a pay cut. Genius.

stonerboner ,

Ah, a red herring.

According to you, there should be only one law that protects people and protects them fully. If the law is specific to a sector, it’s bad because saving people’s data doesn’t give them healthcare. And if it doesn’t protect people in other sectors (foreign vs domestic) then it can’t possibly be a good move.

It’s an all-or-nothing mentality that is extremely idealistic to the point of ignoring incremental progress, and will make it so that no law is ever good or enough.

Stopping the bleeding of data harvesting to China is good. If you want other change alongside it, hold your elected officials to it.

There’s really no point in continuing a discussion with such an idealistic purist, as no law can be good enough.

stonerboner ,

Lmao “BFFS.” You love making me into whatever you want to rail against.

Congress didn’t ban an app. They requested data on where their information flows, and the “stupid dancing app” opted to leave the market instead of comply.

You don’t even know what the fuck you’re going on about haha

stonerboner ,

I’m stating than less than 2% of American TikTok users will use VPN to bypass TikTok leaving the market.

You’re crazy if you think VPN usage is high among the general public on a regular basis. And that number’s intersection with using a VPN to specifically work around this will be extremely low.

I absolutely stand by holding TikTok responsible, and any other company responsible. This, coupled with the FTC poised to bring back Net Nuetrality, is a great step in the right direction. I look forward to this energy setting up more data protection, foreign and domestic.

stonerboner ,

Lmao I must have struck a nerve to get 7 replies from you.

You keep returning to your red herring because you don’t actually have a decent argument.

I bet you’re really mad at some internet stranger, maybe you should take a break

stonerboner ,

Then you should write and call those lawmakers. You are a part of the body that elects them. Or run for office and fight the good fight yourself.

I do hope we do get some domestic reform, but I’m able to separate this small foreign policy win from the huge need for comprehensive domestic policy.

stonerboner ,

Keep it up. Work is slow and watching you flounder is helping

stonerboner ,

It’s much easier to give your kid your old phone and pay $10 a month for a kids’ account than to deal with your kid constantly wanting to use your phone.

stonerboner ,

When they are at the point of going to sleepovers, play dates at friends, camp, etc it also makes a lot of sense to give them a lifeline.

The kids line I pay for gives me all the parental controls I could dream of and control over her contacts. I am 100% present, but I’m not dumb enough to send me kid out into the world without a lifeline.

It seems being needlessly judgmental is the easiest of all.

stonerboner ,

When they are at the point of going to sleepovers, play dates at friends, camp, etc it also makes a lot of sense to give them a lifeline.

The kids line I pay for gives me all the parental controls I could dream of and control over her contacts. I am 100% present, but I’m not dumb enough to send me kid out into the world without a lifeline.

It seems being needlessly judgmental is the easiest of all.

stonerboner ,

Lmoa you’re suggesting that me fully managing my seven year old’s phone is dystopian? The free-phone-because-it’s-my-old-phone with great parental controls is way safer than a dumb phone with no contact management or GPS tracking.

You can do whatever the fuck you want in this “dystopian” world, but try to be less judgmental when you think a dumb phone is a better option for a child.

stonerboner ,

I use my phone for work. My child sees me use my phone 8 hours a day. Of course she wants to use the thing she sees me use all the time. She loves taking pictures on our hikes and looking through the photo albums. This is completely normal and supervised.

What’s weird is all the assumptions that I would let my kid have free rein on a smartphone, and assumptions as to how my child really enjoying using my phone is somehow a bad thing. We live in a not great part of town and having gps tracking, only mom/dad/grandparents as contacts, and other safety features makes my old-gen smartphone a good lifeline.

Ya’ll are missing the forest for the trees with your assumptions.

stonerboner ,

Yes, I’d rather teach them to responsibly use their own tool instead of them wanting mine, in a supervised way. So crazy, right?

stonerboner ,

Any twisting ya’ll are doing is all by yourself. What I said is true, and if ya’ll need to fill in the blanks to fit your judgmental narratives, that’s not my problem.

Maybe just stop being needlessly obfuscative or dogmatic and we could have avoided all of this 🤷‍♂️

stonerboner ,

I clearly stated it was a supervised seven year old pretty early on, yet you just kept on about it as if I was some negligent parent lol. Not sure if it was you or the one of the other you’s in the thread who called me “dystopian” lmao.

Ya’ll could also reply with civility either way. I know it’s a lot to expect of people on the internet, but jeeze man. There are much better hills to die on

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •