chicken
@chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- Comment on Gave him an offer, then took it away. Thanks PayPal. 1 hour ago:
Not everybody has all the information to know whether a company is known for this kind of shit. I’ve heard a lot of stories about PayPal screwing over sellers in particular by freezing their funds for no justified reason, but I can see people falling for the “they must have been doing something bad they aren’t admitting” you always see in response to anyone complaining about some authority imposing arbitrary punishments on them.
My personal gripe with PayPal is, I was once relying on income from sales through them, and had withdrawn money to my bank that I needed to pay my rent. A customer filed a spurious dispute (later resolved in my favor) on a sale that was only a tiny portion of that, and their response was to immediately reverse the whole completed bank transfer. So I almost missed paying rent and had to scramble to figure it out.
Anyway, fuck PayPal, sympathy to all their victims.
- Comment on Anon describes currency 1 day ago:
I think the other answers people are giving are wrong. It’s backed by debt and the enforcement of that debt.
- Comment on New York Bitcoin Miners Are Buying Up Power Plants—and Communities Are Fighting Back 5 days ago:
Besides the climate implications, this highlights the centralization risks in Proof of Work mining; the only way to mine Bitcoin profitably is if you have some kind of privileged access to electricity with effectively low ongoing cost, and that access is gated by government regulation.
- Comment on Anon takes the last bus 5 days ago:
Is this a post about racism
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
What’s basically being said is, making an AI powered software local-only doesn’t make a difference and doesn’t matter. But that’s not true, and the arguments for that don’t seem coherent.
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
But the company hasn’t collected it, because it doesn’t have it. Your computer has it. So long as it stays on your computer, it cannot harm your privacy. That’s why there is such a big difference here; an actual massive loss of privacy, vs a potential risk of loss of privacy.
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
Software that is designed not to send your data over the internet doesn’t collect your data. That’s what local-only means. If it does send your data over the internet, then it isn’t local-only. How is it still happening?
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
So you don’t think collection of user data is a meaningful privacy problem here? How does that work?
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
Even with Recall, a hypothetical non-local equivalent would be significantly worse. Whether Microsoft actually has your data or not obviously matters. Most conceivable software that uses local AI wouldn’t need any kind of profile building anyway, for instance that Firefox translation feature.
The thing that’s frustrating to me here is the lack of acknowledgement that the main privacy problem with AI services is sending all queries to some company’s server where they can do whatever they want with them.
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
I don’t see how the possibility it’s connected to some software system for profile building, is a reason to not care whether a language model is local only. The way things are worded here make it sound like this is just an intrinsic part of how LLMs work, but it just isn’t.
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
The use of local AI does not imply doing that, especially not the centralizing part.
- Comment on Tech Companies Apparently Do Not Understand Why We Dislike AI 1 week ago:
I don’t care if your language model is “local-only” and runs on the user’s device. If it can build a profile of the user (regardless of accuracy) through their smartphone usage, that can and will be used against people.
I don’t know if I’m understanding this argument right, but the idea that integrating locally run AI is inherently privacy destroying in the same way as live service AI doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
- Comment on People Are Losing Loved Ones to AI-Fueled Spiritual Fantasies 1 week ago:
as confirmed by a Reddit thread on r/ChatGPT
hmmmmmm
- Comment on Anon watches Game of Thrones 1 week ago:
From the above linked article:
In the case of the Israeli kibbutzim (collective farms), children were reared somewhat communally in peer groups, based on age, not biological relations. A study of the marriage patterns of these children later in life revealed that out of the nearly 3,000 marriages that occurred across the kibbutz system, only 14 were between children from the same peer group. Of those 14, none had been reared together during the first six years of life.
And lots of other examples across different cultures that would be consistent with this being an instinctual reaction of humans, rather than a cultural thing that is taught.
- Comment on Anon watches Game of Thrones 1 week ago:
Well yeah, but that is still “biologically ingrained to avoid incest”, since being raised separately and then reintroduced as adults is an edge case. The effect is biological even if what it’s directly testing for isn’t genetics.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
For that you would have to completely change how currency is issued and managed. Money is created by being borrowed directly or indirectly from the central bank, and the reason it is possible for those loans to later be repaid is because even more money is loaned out later, so it’s not going to be a game of musical chairs where there isn’t enough money going around to pay them all back, they keep bringing in more chairs. There is always an increasing amount of money in the system, and they make it that way on purpose to keep things running the way they want them to.
Personally what I hate about this setup is, a person who meets the requirements to obtain a business loan can now take this money that was created out of thin air, use it to coerce labor out of people who have no way to get money other than working, and keep the profits. What if our lives would all be better off working a bit less? Too bad, that decision isn’t up to us, how much we must work is indirectly decided by monetary policy, which the average person realistically has zero influence over, and the goal is a high level of “economic activity”, ie. as many people as possible subject to financial coercion.
- Comment on Game design question : how to make a "trapped" player character? 1 week ago:
Here’s an idea: gameplay sort of like Goblin Cleanup, you have various chores you have to do cleaning and arranging the various levels of the tower at night while the dragon is home, and your work has to pass an inspection. Then during the day you are locked in your room, and have some ability to watch a prospective rescuer attempt the dungeon crawl without your direct input. But you can strategically place items, enemy spawns, and Dark Souls style hints to try to tip the scales. So kind of like a tower defense in reverse where you are trying to lose.
- Comment on Open source AI models favor men for hiring, study finds 2 weeks ago:
Not even just because people are idiots, but also because a LLM is going to have quirks you will need to work around or exploit to get the best results out of it. Like how it’s better to edit your question to clarify a misunderstanding and regenerate the response than it is to respond again with the correction, because there is more of a risk it gets stuck on its mistake that way. Or how it can be useful in some situations to (if the interface allows this) manually edit part of the LLM output to be more in line with what you want it to be saying before generating the rest.
- Comment on Anon talks to a girl 2 weeks ago:
They’re free to reject it
When I was young, insecure about my sexual inexperience, convinced I was worth less than others, and on 4chan all the time, there were some levels on which I really did not understand that, which led to some uncomfortable situations, and could easily have led to worse ones. Flirting isn’t really something you analyze and make decisions about anyway, if someone isn’t responding to it, maybe that says something about how they are feeling and should be respected regardless of if they understand on a conscious level what is going on.
- Comment on Anon talks to a girl 2 weeks ago:
It’s ok but it’s like this idea that they should be ashamed for not thinking to do it, like it’s their obligation as a man or something
- Comment on Anon talks to a girl 2 weeks ago:
Why does this type of greentext feel so manipulative
- Comment on The inarguable case for banning social media for teens 2 weeks ago:
The argument they make seems to boil down to, there’s various reasons to believe that social media can be a negative influence on teenagers, the idea of social media bans is popular with the public in polls, and the Trump administration opposes social media regulation. So yeah, not all that comprehensive. Notably lacking is a case that a youth ban is actually the right solution and wouldn’t cause its own harms, an explanation of why teenagers and adults are so different here and what that implies, or an acknowledgement of the cases against such a ban (for instance they make an uncritically positive reference to last year’s ban by Australia which is extremely controversial and has a lot of good arguments against it, like the privacy disaster of making everyone prove their identity to post online). To be fair the whole thing seems like mostly a really brief summary of The Anxious Generation, maybe that book makes a stronger point.
It has to be acknowledged that much of what makes up human culture and society is online now, and will continue to be going forward. The real question should be, what do we want that society to look like, and how do we move in that direction? Probably there is a lot more to it than passing laws that ban things. Calling social media digital crack and demanding teenagers to go live in a past that doesn’t exist anymore seems like a very head-in-sand attitude to me.
- Comment on 4chan Is Dead. Its Toxic Legacy Is Everywhere 3 weeks ago:
If that was the case he could have deleted /pol/ and banned its users. 2016 would have been a great time for that.
- Comment on As literally everything gets more and more expensive, Everspace 2's devs say screw it, let's make our upcoming DLC cheaper 3 weeks ago:
That’s not even necessarily them being nice, if your audience can suddenly afford less, that changes what the optimal price would be for maximizing sales * price. The cost of producing an electronic copy of a DLC is zero.
- Comment on PSA: I want a law for PC games to be offered in physical versions again 3 weeks ago:
If we’re wishing for things that probably won’t happen, how about a government agency for game preservation? Source code gets submitted before release, approval for sale is conditional on them being able to successfully build and deploy it. Then 20 years later it gets automatically published to the public domain. That way even online only games will end up being preserved.
- Comment on Is 4chan dead forever? Where are the refugees going? 4 weeks ago:
One possible reason I’ve read is that the people moderating it have had their identities leaked, so imagine being the person responsible for banning 4chan users and now also they know who you are, seems like a very unappealing thing to volunteer for.
- Comment on This is what a digital coup looks like 4 weeks ago:
You know, you probably know this phrase, “Do not obey in advance.” That’s Tim Snyder, who’s a historian of authoritarianism. We now are in techno-authoritarianism. We have to learn how to digitally disobey. That can be as simple as the dropdown box. Don’t accept the cookies, don’t give your real name, download Signal
… post on Lemmy?
- Comment on Venezuelan migrants relied on clickwork to survive. Now AI is replacing them 4 weeks ago:
“There is no formal relationship between the platforms and the workers. If the tasks disappear, they are simply no longer called,” he said.
Fuentes and 19 other Venezuelan taskers have a WhatsApp group where they take turns to alert members when a task becomes available. “If someone has insomnia, they say, ‘Don’t worry, I’ll keep an eye out tonight,’” she said.
I used to do online gig work like this. The good part is you don’t really have to directly interact with anyone, the bad part is this stuff, garbage pay, and the platforms not giving a fuck about whether clients scam you or falsely tank your approval rating. To even obtain decent tasks you basically have to do what these people did with an active group chat, or cheat and use scripts to automatically snipe them and notify you.
The most memorable ones were stuff like, transcribing videos of maintenance people describing what they were doing, and watching video feeds of surgery robots and rating the skills of their operators.
Despite all the shitty aspects of it, I think it sucks this kind of work is going away, because it is really convenient to have as an option and used to be an effective way to avoid getting a traditional job if you were really dead set on that. And I guess a good option in general for people in countries with very low cost of living.
- Comment on Anon finally finds a girlfriend 4 weeks ago:
Judging by some of the vrchat threads I’ve seen Anon is way ahead of you on this
- Comment on A colossal squid is filmed in its natural habitat for the first time 4 weeks ago:
That’s amazing thanks for the link