pona-a

Yes, but does can author truly predict how they'll misread their work? Should we treat the audience as cattle to be deprived of every emotion that doesn't serve some external political goal? The author might indulge in vividly painting their setting so its more surface level reading might appear desirable, but when its evils are not even subtle but are already just actual text, can you do much more to counteract bad actors trying to sell society than same dystopia brought to life?

Re: Re: Fediverse. My point was more than indeed the Fediverse is more a technical detail than an actual cohesive platform, so it only makes sense to talk about Mastodon, whereas XMPP is more cohesive by virtue of instant messenging being a lot less opinionated.

It just so happens it splits into well-maintained projects supporting the concensus features, and dead or dying projects that don't, modulo a couple contrarians, with a couple more features floating in limbo, having finalized or draft specs that nobody really implements.

That sort of problem isn't best fixed by centralization on one client/server but just certification, which Conversations/ModernXMPP already leads.

As for apps, yes normal people aren't very conscious of what a native app is, but they do feel when their app lags on their older phone, doesn't recieve push notifications, or just looks a little odd in places, which can happen in a one size fits all app. Some of the most popular messengers, like WhatsApp or Telegram, to my knowledge use platform specific tooling, and normal people genuinely appreciate how snappy they feel.

But the issue is more so about developer time. Yes a cross platform app lets you reuse the same work everywhere, but the lead developer still has personal blind spots, and might simply not consider or be able to test things like bespoke Apple workarounds for non-iCloud/encrypted chat push.

Plus it's a communication protocol, like email; we should be expecting people reimplementing it in the weirdest of places. For software like this, the duplication of effort is what drives you to make an elegant design in the first place.

This is effectively settled. Every client worth using has standardized on certain extensions, and there are server capability testers for it [0].

There are still a LOT of things very much up in the air, such as message deletion, which work inconsistently from client to client, but message history is not it.

[0] https://compliance.conversations.im/

Mastodon too has several client (web)apps. The Fediverse is itself a more neutral protocol with more heterogeneous platforms based on it (e.g. Lemmy, Pixelfed, etc), so Mastodon refers more to the platform (schema, UX, wider community) than the individual UI you use to access it, which just happens to usually be whatever your instance admin serves by default.

As for apps, people simply prefer instant messengers purposefully designed for their platform. There is genuinely a lot of platform-specific quirks around things like push notifications, which a non-iPhone developer not have the motivation to figure out. Besides that, a lot of these predate contemporary cross-platform technologies like Flutter.

This is a very flimsy argument to say a vibe coded one-shot Claude app is equivalent to actually hand-made Django app hosted on a Linux system that runs systemd which used Claude PR reviews.

People don't care about your entire dependency chain, see how little the most valuable FOSS libraries recieve in donations or sponsorships compared to end-user apps. They care about how well put together your own app is, which we know AI use changes for the worst (which some argue is worth it for momentum).

As long as your dependencies aren't outright dysfunctional (see rsync debate), it's concensus to disregard AI use there.

Just because techbros keep misreading allegories for societal ills as ads doesn't mean their authors have any influence on the future, beyond the warning or inspiration their works bring.

It used to be OpenAI was a real research organization that wrote real open-access papers that aren't marketing brochures, and when they did large training runs, they released all artifacts including model weights. Now certainly they are anything but. We haven't learned learned anything meaningful about ML from OpenAI since GPT-3 was released.

Their open-weights competitors like Facebook can at least claim some kind of public benefit, but it's still just running a well-understood algorithm on dubiously obtained data with longer and longer runs, give or take some inconsequential architectural tweaks.

Anthropic's mechanistic interpretability work is the most "lab-like" of these, but it's still just secondary to selling subscriptions and fear-mongering for regulatory capture/investment/publicity.

Is this actually grounded in real experiences and not headlines? Have real projects / people actually experienced this hyperbolic insta-hack you describe? People are getting DDoSed regularly sure, but no, you don't get hacked the instant you forward a port, in my experience hosting a few public services in my community.

This was an issue before watermarking was publically announced. I'm also not an expert, but aren't bits of a hash indistinguishible from uniform randomness?

Maybe it happens that LLMs are great at finding human bugs which have some more patterned structure that's easier to match for then LLM bugs. They prefer LLM prose to human prose, so what if they're similarly wooed by slop code?

Just like external AUX-type-C DACs, manufacturers took a trivial feature of a smartphone and outsourced it to an array of disposable device vendors with questionable practices

What's their excuse with Flock-like surveillance? Leaving the house is consent to their tracking. Let's be real: they don't value consent in any form.

I wouldn't be surprised one of those big-tech product managers gets tried for not understanding sexual consent either.

In his defense, ECC is unusually fast compared to both RSA and current PQ

In the case of the US AI industry, how about some stricter banking laws to forbid its current circular financing?

euroan

That's what happens with scale...

The purpose of a car itself didn't change. But the massive inflated demand, as our city planners decided every adult must be put in a rolling metal cage to participate in society, changed the environment it was originally designed for.

Now it's a matter of geopolitical stability, or even basic human habitability of these spaces, that a car converts as much of that chemical energy into movement, and releases as little toxic byproducts in the process. Whereas before, that cost, at scale, was small enough to neglect.

Just like a modern CPU evolved into an incomprehensible mess, even though the basic consumer needs hadn't changed much, because the politics of computing forced them to run expanding institutional cruft at reasonable speeds, on battery-powered always-on addiction machines.

So brainrot? I don't want to belittle anyone's creative pursuits, but really, I struggle to see how "Balenciaga Harry Potter" is any more artistic than "Italian Animals".

Not platforming your slop is the same as killing minorities? Okay...

Codeberg is not a state. This is not life and death. If you have any disagreements, feel free to join another community. The network effect hadn't kicked in yet, you're free to compete in the marketplace of ideas.

We have a non peer reviewed proof in a niche area of mathematics claiming to have been "co-written" by an LLM. What are the comments about? Lamenting or celebrating humanity's intellectual death... Very insightful.

"Why spend $1k on a helicopter ride to Costco when you can bike there?"

A sustainable patronage from the Russian intelligence community? /j

Speak for yourself. Programming was my main hobby and I've diversified into learning aelectronics to have some escape from the blatant current of anti-intellectualism in software. Yes something major is lost when you commission a plagiarism machine and resign to fixing its messes - you.

The title reads a lot like the lab logs you'd find in a horror game.

But for the paper itself, it seems they're using genetic optimization over predefined keywords. Wonder what would happen if they did gradient descent on the latent space directly. Is brain stimulation just not a good domain for GD?

> Did they?

Look, this was a headline I recalled seeing in the news. I do not live in the US, and honestly I'm kinda tired of hearing as much about your (?) politics. If I hadn't used the uncertainty qualifier, I would have been lying.

That said, I believe it did pass almost unanimously, coming into effect in 2027 or something. The law in question required all cars come equipped with intoxication detection systems and refuse to start failing that check.

> vocal exception

I'm not from there, yet even I can tell the system is as broken as it could be. There are two parties funded by almost the same oligarchs, one advocating for open fascism and the other aimlessly laundering elite interests in nominal progressivism, while being more concerned with exterminating actual leftists within than tackling their opposition. You've steadily passed age verification in most major states, followed by a bipartisan federal bill.

Your system does the same thing as EU-steadily laundering corporate agenda into legislation. At least in most of the EU, this shared disease hasn't progressed into the stage of eroding so much of workers rights and basic environmental protections. But with the recent populist currents, I can imagine the median voter will vote for their starvation if only to spite the brown people.

> Bad Springfield hence not bad Vernapool

The argument that started this thread was that the EU itself needs to be entirely abolished because it produces laws of this nature.

If you apply that same standard, do you think cessation is what the US states should do too? Well, these same laws easily pass into state legislation too. All you'd be doing is delaying the inevitable, if you don't cut the problem at its root.

And the US wanted to install a breathalyzer in every car a few years back. How is this supposed to prove anything?

I think the groups pushing for these laws are largely right neoliberals. Historically, while being nominally in competition with both far-right and left, they have found it much easier to compromise with the right or mobilize against the left.

To make the point explicit, Orwell wouldn't find most dystopian the fact your Speakwrite refuses to write anti-state messages, and support the right to subsidized local uncensored Speakwrites. The battle for the public minds was lost when they forgot how to write.

If the point of those events is to be registered by the game program, you already have all the data you need, otherwise you're building a keylogger.

The most the kernel can try to tell you is what's plugged in, but the cheater can easily make the fake HID interposed between the real keyboard and USB.

But really, if HID becomes suspect too, then why do you even need kernel level anti-cheat, if all you can do is behavioral detection?

Orwell also imagined a future where Speakwrites made everyone unable to write by hand, making their thoughts dull and tanged as a long unprepared monologue tends to be.

I don't think he's anywhere on your side.