uyzstvqs

Honestly, this is either a game developer skill issue or laziness issue, not Vulkan's fault. Most big game developers have been notoriously negligent at any form of technical optimization in recent years.

To clarify: Microsoft linked to a dataset on Kaggle, which is falsely labeled CC0 (Public Domain). It's the fault of the user who uploaded the dataset and misrepresented the licensing.

If you're smart, AI will enable you to learn, work, and do things faster and better than ever before. If you're a fool, you'll try to put the tool in charge, and you will destroy everything you've built.

There are dozens of websites dedicated to exactly this type of abuse. Regulators are silent about them. Why?

This abuse is against Grok's ToS, it was (!) possible because Grok doesn't want to be every user's overly prude nanny by banning nudity, they want to support artistic freedom. Unlike these dedicated websites, Grok's intent was good. Looking up "undress AI", there are a lot of results, and none of them are Grok. Yet Grok is being targeted, and exclusively so.

Think about this for a moment, and try to explain why.

Is this hosted on DigitalOcean, say in The Netherlands? Could it be that spam traffic within the same datacenter bypasses their detection?

Digital ID to interact with government services is great. It becomes a problem when they add something like OpenID4VC to it, with the intention of linking it to all your online activity for "age verification". This would create one giant government metadata silo on every individual's online activity.

It'd be best to create a standard for this using wallet apps. You can obtain an age certificate from any trusted provider (decentralized chain-of-trust similar to TLS CAs), which you can then load into any wallet app of your choice on any OS, and use it with any online service which supports the standard. This should use anonymous, unlinkable(!) proofs, with the only certified data being `is_over_age`.

Though I'd prefer the way proposed by Mark Camilleri Gambin (EU politician). Have parents enable Child Mode during device setup, then expose `isMinor = true` to all websites and apps, require a parental control PIN to disable. This is a much better and cleaner solution. Requiring age verification of all adults gets it backwards.

It'd be even simpler. If a device is in Child Mode (which would be activated by parents during setup, and require a separate PIN to disable), it'd respond with status.isMinor = true. Or even simpler, make it a HTTP header.

What I meant is that it doesn't exist yet. It'd require operating systems, apps, browsers, etc, to all implement this system before a company like Discord can actually use it.

True, and that'd be the best method by far. A European politician recently proposed this.[0] The issue is that a single service can't just implement this. If I'm a service and I need age verification, I need something that I can implement by myself.

[0] https://democrats.eu/en/protecting-minors-online-without-vio...

Can't we just do this age verification locally on-device? Just some WASM to run a small AI model, which scans face+ID.

I know it'll be easier to bypass, but that does not matter. We're trying to stop children, not adults with technical skill.

[citation needed]

Economics apply the same way to art. It can be one of the most profitable solo-endeavors, when your art is generally accepted as good or meaningful.

All the government-subsidized art that I've come across is straight up awful, and nobody ever actually cares for it. Typically it's weird abstract stuff.

By these standards, should I be paid an income from your tax money for my 5 side-projects on GitHub that nobody uses?

The smuggling is nothing new. Sounds like they're testing laser-based countermeasures against them now.

[0] https://x.com/petemuntean/status/2021586247827828812

How does one turn "Tesla has computer-connected steering wheels at their office" into "Tesla robotaxis as controlled by remote workers with steering wheels on their desks"?

This reminds me of people saying that ChatGPT was actually just quick typists from India, back in 2022.

Is it open source?

Not a Trump-supporter nor anti-Trump. It's fine to name a government program after the administration which built it, like the Eisenhower Interstate System or how Obamacare became a common name.

What detestable is when dictators consider themselves a supreme leader of a country, like in North Korea and Iran, and they put up statues and portraits all over the place to mark the entire country as theirs.

Threema is Swiss, which is a regional EFTA member. It's end-to-end encrypted and the clients are open-source.

Zulip has client-server encryption, which is fine if you control the server.

It's been more than a year, and Element X does honestly look a lot better. But it's been mobile-only for years. And if I'm correct, the desktop/web clients still require you to use embedded Jitsi. And what about non-Element clients?

As a user, I just need stuff like this to be standard, and work for every participant regardless of what client they use.

This does not bode well. Matrix is honestly not good, as someone who has tried to use it. It's slow, janky, often unstable, and poorly standardized.

My suggestion: https://threema.com/en/products/work (hosted) or https://zulip.com/ (OSS self-hosted).

Absolutely. And trying to be invasive by adding Copilot buttons everywhere. It's reminiscent of "free toolbar" adware.

Solution: Add MCP to MS applications, then isolate Copilot to its own app.

Showing ID at a store doesn't de-facto make a copy. They don't associate my full ID to the purchase, at most a manually entered DoB.

And if you're suggesting Digital ID (EUDI style); showing ID at the store doesn't share metadata of that purchase with the government.

You're free to start your own space exploration company.

The problem is the monopoly over distribution channels. Regulation needs to force devices to allow A) downloading and using packages & executables from the internet, and B) any app to download and install other apps.

Regulating the fees for one central app store is no solution.

WhatsApp bans spam pretty quickly. Unfiltered spam is much, much worse.

Ubuntu Touch has amazing UX, IMO. Sadly it's been non-viable for practically forever, and is non-viable today unless you want to use a 7-year-old out-of-production device. It's practically abandonware with a few hobby maintainers at this point, as much as it had potential compared to other alternatives.

A custom API is the only way for a platform to extend its native E2EE sessions and features to other platforms. Making those APIs completely open would become a major spam problem, which would likely end them up in the same situation as SMTP, where small servers are blocked-by-default by big providers.

Interoperability by agreement between legitimate messaging services, using custom APIs is the only realistic and secure way to accomplish this.

There's also one with just en-US: https://dl.bobpony.com/windows/unofficial/Win_7_ESU_AiO_x64_...

JPEG XL is also good, but why not use AVIF? It's widely supported by browsers, and rivals JPEG XL in being the best lossy image format.

Yggdrasil can peer over the internet, but that's just convenience. In a global internet blackout, you obviously wouldn't have a global Yggdrasil network in a week, month or year, but you can have a reasonable regional network in that time. Every user is a node and can expand the network to new people. It's a P2P mesh, not volunteer-run. As regional networks start to peer to each other, it forms one big network automatically. You need cables and hardware, but that's not a problem when everyone has the incentive of wanting to use it.

You could build a public network over Reticulum, but why deal with the inconveniences of the protocol just to run it over high-bandwidth? It's specifically optimized for very low-bandwidth transports, so that you can cover long distances with just a small group of participants.

> The criminal provisions for hate conduct are built around whether specific public behavior would cause a reasonable person in the target group “to feel intimidated, to fear harassment or violence, or to fear for their safety.”

> This standard can apply even where there is no evidence that anyone actually experienced fear or harm. The definition is tied to subjective perceptions of risk, rather than solely observable incitement to violence.

> The Bill expands the “reasonable person” test used in hate-related offenses. Speech may now be criminal if a so-called reasonable person in the targeted group would consider it offensive, insulting, humiliating, or intimidating. Violence or threats of violence are not required.