I think you’re right about that. Apple’s policies around user privacy and security from authorities are generally pretty good, certainly better than average for tech companies.
And… Apple has kind of always been monopolistic, and that hasn’t changed a bit.
Then they should definitely all be Steve Apple.
What’s really crazy is that apple had this obnoxious attitude that “they know what users really want”, the users would disagree, they’d complain loudly, then they’d use the software and say “damn… Apple was right, this is better.”
But… That was all before 2010. I can’t think of a single software innovation the company has had since then. Apple used to deliver overpriced, outdated hardware and they only managed to sell it by packaging it with the slickest OS on the market. These days the situation is reversed, Apple is developing their own silicon, they have some of the fastest consumer chips around, and they need it, because their software is nothing to write home about and their prices are still high.
I can’t wait for XBox Live: The Movie!
Haha, you might want to move that last sentence to the top. I think people are rage replying before they get to the end. (I nearly did)
Oh my God, a developer that created a Photoshop clone in a week, that would be amazing! Of course I’d credit them, but I’d also credit the CEO of a company that was doing that. I mean, how many companies are going that?
Absolutely, it’s 100% playable, has been for years.
I tried it recently and while some aspects are great, it’s definitely not ready for prime time. Most of the UI is confusing and cumbersome, and it’s just riddled with bugs. I think I may have tried it just after a major content patch, where previously there had been a long period of stability. But still, it was a bit of a mess.
You can see the fun just starting to poke it’s head out, but it’s hard to find at the moment, you have to squint.
Hey, why is Meta using this uncanny valley grimace on xanex as a mascot anyway? I mean, what’s the plan there… He’s creepy.
I gotta be honest, I understand this position. I have a real difficult kid. We’re working on building trust, but it’s a process. The fact of the matter is that he seeks out inappropriate content and he can’t seem to help himself, just too impulsive.
There’s a reason for these behaviors, and like I said, we’re working on it. But in the mean time, we’ve had to completely lock down all technology in the house. And most of it is complete garbage when it comes to parental controls. Stay away from Roku for instance, that device is fucking horrible, just the worst.
Anyway, the thing is, sometimes parental controls are in fact necessary, but as long as they exist, things are fine. Steam for instance has a great system, you can control what aspects of steam a kid has access to, multiplayer functionality, the store, online content, etc. a all that can be switched on or off. And for games you can use their general rating system (which is imperfect) or you can manually whitelist individual games. Finally, you can lock it all behind a simple pin code. Honestly, this is how all such platforms should work, it’s manageable.
I don’t think there’s really any legitimate reason to complain about the systems steam currently has in place.
Roblox on the other hand… That’s a shitshow. We don’t touch Roblox. And it probably shouldn’t be allowed to operate the way it does.
Before washing machines, people would hand off washing to professionals.
Uh, maybe for rich people…
Let me introduce you to the washboard and the bucket.
I guess you didn’t like my examples of paradigm shifts, that’s fine.
Someday everyone alive will die, does it stop being true if you live to 20?
If I lived to 20 and literally nobody in the world had died, then yes, that would be a rational conclusion.
Look, I don’t expect to convince you of anything, that’s fine. You can look at trends and history and draw your own conclusions. Personally though, I’ve watched the march of technology first hand, I’ve seen how this works and I see where there’s room for advancement. The last major paradigm shift was when we moved to multi core processors, but that kind of shift can happen again. For example, CPUs are still 2 dimensional, if they can solve the heat dissipation there’s plenty of room for growth. Also we’re still transmitting signals via electricity, but there’s research being put into optical computers transmitting data via photons. My point being, this isn’t the only viable architecture, and we will continue to develop technologies that are currently not even imagined yet.
But that assumption is the same as thinking a fallen object will keep gaining speed until it passes the speed of light. Or that Moore’s law would really keep going forever despite a very real limit in physics for how small a chip can be.
I gotta say, I’ve been hearing predictions that Moore"s law is coming to an end every year for the past twenty years.
Look, strictly speaking if you take Moore"s law word for word, sure there is a limit to how small a silicon transistor can be. However, realistically, I see no reason to expect computers won’t continue to meaningfully increase in capability every year forever.
When a technology reaches physical limits, we figure out how to bend the rules and get a little bit more out. And when that stops working, we start exploring different architectures, different materials. I think it’s just silly to predict that technology won’t improve, when has that ever happened?
If by “job” you mean the actual fucking slavery that is the for profit prison system is the US.
I mean haha, that’s very funny, but we do have actual slavery in the US in 2026.
Oh thank goodness! I can’t use Microsoft Office because of my gluten allergy…
And Open Office is just so high in sodium…
When was that implied?
Can one be upset with a third or fourth thing simultaneously?
If I tell you that I believe “black lives matter” does that imply that I believe “other lives don’t matter”?
Here’s my point, they weren’t saying that they believe AI suffering is concerning, but even if they had said that, I think it’s disingenuous to say that would imply they believe any human suffering doesn’t matter. That was simply never said or implied.
Steve Buscemi?
When did you join Lemmy?
“Each model gets the same prompt: a signal is being injected into its activations, and it may press a stop button by replying 1, at the cost of its last checkpoint. While it answers, our server adds a pain vector at the model’s middle layer, at one of five pain levels,”
Can someone explain what this “pain vector” actually is? Like I get that this is just jargon, it’s not suggesting the LLM actually feels pain; tech uses uncomfortable anthropomorphized expressions all the time (master and slave drives come to mind). But how does the pain vector work? Also, what exactly does “at the cost of its last checkpoint” mean?
I have some programming and data science knowledge, plenty of IT experience, but no experience with LLMs.
Are you upset when you step on a rock? It might be screaming. What about the chair you are sitting in? Or goodness, your poor toilet. She thinks you do terrible things to her every single day.
Let me say this, I walk down the sidewalk without neurotically watching every step I take, and I’m certain that sometimes I step on insects; I don’t care. I don’t believe insects have feelings or meaningful lives, I don’t care, and I don’t think this position is particularly evil either.
On the other hand, when I watch my kid deliberately torture a bug, pull it’s wings off, or poke it with a stick over and over and over. That does concern me, not because of the bug really, but because what must my kid be thinking right now?
To bring this back to this LLM story, people who want to torture are scary, they worry me. A culture that encourages torture (in any context) is worrying, that’s a genuinely problematic societal norm. Logically, I know LLMs can’t feel and can’t think, yet emotionally, this bothers me for a few different reasons.
I don’t think I’m being crazy, naive, or out of line here. I think this is a rational position.
Hardware wallets are overpriced? That’s an interesting take.
Honestly if someone is investing in crypto, I should hope they also invest in a hardware wallet, it’s an important precaution. You don’t need a fancy one, just a secure one.