I’m also not thrilled about the obsession with copyright. I was against copyright in the 90s. I was against copyright in the 2000s. I was against copyright in the 2010s. And now these people want to call integrity lack of ethics just because I’m not willing to endorse yet another extension to a legal monopoly forbidding me from running arbitrary algorithms on data supposedly owned by someone else?

I’m sympathetic to the environmental arguments. Though I also would point out there are much greater areas of marginal waste to cut on. Online advertising uses more energy than AI. I look forward to the day it’s banned.

But the whole “we’re going to play pretend that I can ban you from transposing text I wrote through a matrix” thing? Absolutely not. Nothing good comes out of that.

There are a few.

WIPO and juridical infra around it like TRIPS.

Energy Charter Conference (and the treaty it’s based on, the ECT).

OSCE: European “regional security” org.

UNCITRAL: codification of international trade practices and dispute resolution.

IAEA: it’s meant to make nuclear power available to everyone, in practice it does iffy spying for Western powers.

Would have to think a bit harder, there are more.

But probably the ones on this thread are the major ones.

Good news on nuclear, awful news on gas, but considering the German fake energy transition is powered by it, it’s perhaps inevitable.

Also this just annoyed me more than it should:

Nuclear power is a carbon-free source of electricity but it is not typically labeled as green energy, like solar, wind and other renewables. Generating power this way requires mining and processing uranium to create nuclear fuel, an energy-intensive process that produces emissions.

Unlike wind turbines and solar panels, which are made from butterfly shine and faery sighs.

My understanding is that Firefox can’t generate and store them by itself, it needs some other mechanism.

I’m not very convinced by this article. A lot of the “realities” are not, they’re policy choices. Just as an example, the notion of the non-driving elderly adult having to be taken by their child to some office to get an ID is just a consequence of the US choosing not to have compulsory and free or nominal charge ID for all residents. Most of the other objections are equally dependent on specific policy choices, which may apply in some places and not others.

Fantastic! I’m back in. Thank you so much.

I think PTH is not around, not sure about Apollo.

Heh, wrong type of tracker. :)

The dissolution of the SFRY was not just a tragedy, but a crime.

Excellent job, Wolfkiller.

Oh, and buying fossil overpriced energy in the bargain too. How truly good.

Interesting article, and I definitely agree I prefer clear instructions when those are possible.

I only have an objection. When it’s said that no matter how well chatbots behave, it’s bad design, and that they’re being used to substitute expensive people; well, expensive people’s interface is chatting too. So in that regard I’m not sure there’s a meaningful difference. Obviously there is if the chatbot is badly behaved, but the article says that it’s a problem even setting that aside.

It’s an NVDA add-on. It substitutes role announcements with specific 3d located sounds. And fortunately it does work. I should change the manifest to indicate it.

I’m going to be trying that today. I hope my Unspoken version still runs on this.

Wow, it’s like he chose those examples on purpose to make his argument as ridiculous as possible: open borders (except for all the people forbidden to leave), regular elections (except now they’re indefinitely postponed)…

Get your DeepSeek3 and r1 weights before it’s illegal!

One of the things you’re missing is the same techniques are applicable to multimodality. They’ve already released a multimodal model: https://seekingalpha.com/news/4398945-deepseek-releases-open-source-ai-multimodal-model-janus-pro-7b

I see some people are having issues with the scenario, but it’s not as impossible as it seems. The key is that Newtonian mechanics are in principle time-reversible. If a system got to a state one way, it can get back to the state it was by running it backwards, so to speak. A ball going down an inclined plain with a given kinetic energy could be going up that inclined plain up to the top with that same amount of energy.

The problem with these systems is, it’s possible to impel the right amount of force on a mobile so that it goes through a path and then stops. But since there is time reversibility, it should be possible for the mobile to spontaneously start moving from that stopping point and draw the same path.

Other weird similar cases are the so-called space invader (particle going to infinity, and therefore spontaneously appearing in reverse) and some strange n-body problem cases.

I kept giving Mozilla the benefit of the doubt and telling myself things weren’t so bad.

I was wrong.

I’ll continue using Firefox because it’s the least bad option, but I can’t advocate for it in good faith anymore, and I don’t expect it to last long with this orientation.

So it goes.

So it would still help optimising persuasion at scale (also known as lying to people to best et them to act against their interest). Why is this a good thing again?

what do I think the history is? A record of the sites I visited.

What do I think the history isn’t? A correlated record of which advertisements I’ve been exposed to, and which conversions I’ve made, that gets sent to people who are not me.

Pretty relevant distinction. One thing is me tracking myself, another thing is this tracking being sent to others, no matter how purportedly trustworthy.