admin

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's "funny", because without that injection from Google, Mozilla would surely die. And the only reason Google hasn't stopped doing that is because then Chrome (Blink) would be more likely to be treated as a monopoly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Yay, mob justice!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah fair enough. Key part was "arcs that go nowhere". I got so incredibly tired of TV shows that think the way to do mystery is drawing out plot far too slowly, in hopes you'll tune in next episode.

Then again, regarding new trek, I only watched season 1 of Discovery, and the first episode of Picard. I ain't got no patience for this.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (4 children)

And most important (for me): self-contained episodes. No season long story arcs that go nowhere.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That's a a bit too absolute way to look at it.

From their point of view the goal isn't to abolish human involvement, but to minimise the cost. So if they can do the job at the same quality with a quarter of the personnel through AI assistance for less cost, obviously they're gonna do that.

At the same time, just because humans having crappy jobs is the current way we solve the problem of people getting money, doesn't mean we should keep on doing that. Basic income would be a much nicer solution for that, for example. Try to think a bit less conservatively.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I'm not sure how long ago that was, but LLM context sizes have grown exponentially in the past year, from 4k tokens to over a hundred k. That doesn't necessarily affect the quality of the output, although you can't expect it to summarize what it can't hold on memory.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

troed:

It's problematic when people conflate their gut feelings for facts.

Also troed:
I understand activitypub better than creator of Lemmy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Well, that convinced me. Thanks for your insight on the matter, I now know how to value the rest of your comments.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And in one of those cases they are violating a very clear "this is not okay" signal, and in the other they are not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

What I think or what they "may" do is irrelevant regarding public data. What matters is sending a clear signal what you are and are not okay with.

Whether you actively participate in helping them get your data or not might not effectively matter in them acquiring it, but it may heavily impact the fine they get for it afterwards. You might be okay with them getting your data for free, but I'm not, sweet summer child.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

They can still train ML models (create profit) from the data they get from you without consent.

view more: ‹ prev next ›