jantin

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The link does not say in what way people were not supposed to share.

The link is the same kind of self-delusion people show around all of these generative tools: "look the faces are weird, the bird has wrong feathers, the cat has only 2 legs, nothing to worry about" while forgetting that most everything else in a clip works well and that it is the first-of-the-first releases which will get gradually better.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Ylva Johansson. She's Swedish and late last year went on tour around Swedish media about chat control. The media, however, were prepared so hilarity ensued.

https://nordictimes.com/debate/many-misleading-claims-about-chat-control-2-0/

https://mullvad.net/pl/blog/2023/3/28/the-european-commission-does-not-understand-what-is-written-in-its-own-chat-control-bill

[–] [email protected] 31 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The commissioner responsible for the chat control was thoroughly corrupt by a company which created the scanning system. She was also either unbelievably dense or very, VERY dedicated to her role of a pearl-clutching, think-of-the-children granny. To the point of arguing with IT specialists on TV.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

Yes. Most people don't have the awareness of a lot of what's been said in the comments or they suspend it in their daily lives. They do what they feel is right and since most were socialised in a similar way the signal-response expectations match. Then a certain rapport can be formed by the empty interactions borne out of the semi-conscious feeling that it's "right" or "nice" to initiate a small talk and respond to it in kind. In this way indeed most of us are like 15 yo girls, just somewhat more serious and self-controlled.

If I were in a condescensing mood I'd say humans generally are bots following Pavlov's reaction patterns imprinted during upbringing. But this would be a severe oversimplification and a little a-hole talking through me.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Oh I know, but I wanted to make sure no one has any grounds to accuse me of prophecies or something worse. Also the precise date doesn't matter.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

How about the same but about the world? If I gathered together all the places I visited, all documentaries I watched and all conversations I had it adds up to a mere glance at a myriad of different worlds. Every single small region in the world has more history and social and natural structures than any fantasy book. Living is like pulling individual pixels from a 4000000000000...000k photo which then changes every second.

My brain explodes sometimes, but the idea of fractals helps. There is still immense value in perceiving this small collection of pixels as they build up to more and more connected structures.

 

Imagine the following scenario: On the 9th of January 2024 in the morning we wake up to news that President of the USA Joe Biden suffered a stroke and died in White House. The administration confirms that the death was entirely natural and no third party contributed to it. Even before the news reach all TV stations another one breaks: Former president of the USA Donald Trump has suffered a cardiac arrest and died in his residence in Mar a Lago. Early reports claim that the site was secure and no malicious actor could reasonably reach Mr. Trump so the death is most likely natural.

What happens then?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago

Musky and Bezos are probably well aware of this so they happily pour billions into these systems. Whoever gets them up first is essentially taking up space others may want to use later on. The endgame is probably "make the world dependent on MY sat system and hike rates". And if the countries wanted to lay cable? Force the world to bail me when the overblown constellations collapse financially - basically make the kessler the future authorities' problem. Privatise profits, socialise losses, fuck everyone else because I got mine. If things go well the men in charge won't even be alive anymore when shit hits the fan.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Why think they don't? Amazon web service is, well, Amazon, so it's like a Bezos-funded library - if he or other execs wish so they can preserve whatever they wish for as long as they can afford electricity and maintenance. The same goes with google or facebook .. the real question is what will be chosen for preservation when inevitably the reaper comes for these corps in their current form.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 11 months ago (9 children)

Icelandic lichen liquor. Tastes like forest.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 11 months ago

There's probably much more. Half of them only recognised in their village somewhere in the middle of South Asia, the other half too burnt out with work and continuous crises to notice they could be good at something.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Eh, 2022-3 wars are just as horrifying, they just happen on a smaller scale. Look up what was going on in the Bucha town, what are living conditions in Gaza, how many people were forced to leave homes in African and Asian civil wars... The scale of minefields in Ukraine, etc.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Head of a fox

 

As far as I understand how things like facebook or reddit work they:

  1. offer an unpaid service to mass consumer

  2. harvest data of the people who use the service

  3. offer paid advertisement space to companies

  4. companies buy advertising because the vast data promise precise targeting

  5. precisely targeted ads convert into sales for companies

  6. the ROI (profit gained to cost of ads) when buying social media ads is greater than ROI on tv or whatever other ads

  7. social media expand on the profits gained from ad space sold to companies

  8. social media corp announces a brand new feature and we return to point 1)

Which step is the closest to breaking? Where are limits of growth and who hits them first? Is there a cap on marketing budgets beyond which companies won't afford social media ads and tech corps won't afford expansion and maintenance? A cap on how much data (=how precise ads) can they harvest from us? A lower threshold of general wealth below which ads won't convert into more profit because people are too poor? A breaking point of enshittification at which user count (=ad visibility) plummets?

The recent apeshit of tech companies after the raised interest rates made me feel that the entire thing is quite fragile and ripe for falling... But I'm not a financial advice so maybe I'm completely clueless.

 

An overwhelming majority of what we eat is made from plants and animals. This means that composition of our almost entire food is chemicals from the realm of organic chemistry (carbon-based large molecules). Water and salt are two prominent examples of non-organic foodstuffs - which come from the realm of inorganic chemistry. Beside some medicines is there any more non-organic foods? Can we eat rocks, salts, metals, oxides... and I just don't know that?

 

I get where the name comes from, but Threads may or may not have been the best choice

view more: next ›