TeMPOraL

8 ms·

121.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
The idiocy of those arguments around AI and climate are indeed a fuel for climate change denial, because the only consistent views are that either the AI is not an environmental disaster, or the whole climate change thing must be overblown.
122.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
LLMs ironically are changing this[0], but at least until now, rifling through random people's data did not scale , so aside for a subset of cases where it was possible to automate access to some services or otherwise leverage them int
123.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
I'm sad to hear your business model didn't survive the march of technology, but at the same time, this is what's been happening to everyone ultimately. And rightfully, no one is entitled to a business model working in perpetu
124.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
> It's a robbery of our future culture, at least. That is a different argument entirely, though. Not the one GP presented. On this, I have no concrete views. Sloppifying is real, and AI is short-circuiting "this loop of excha
125.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
It's not a perspective, it's a literal fact . We won't get anywhere in these discussion if good chunk of participants cannot admit to the trivially observable facts about the actual objective reality in which they live in.
126.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Right. But the neat things against current evolution of LLMs is that "open-weight" models are still tracking SOTA by 3-6 months, so even if all the commercial operators shut down access tomorrow, everyone would still have access t
127.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Sure they do. In fact, I'd tentatively claim that if you cannot easily find an utilitarian[0] argument backing an ethical one, it's a good sign the ethical argument is some flawed ideology that will be used to justify suffering an
128.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
At the scale you'd expect that to happen, looking at credential dumps, you'd also expect to hear a lot about it. And yet, you don't. Which leads me to the conclusion that the data dump are overblown. I think companies aroun
129.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
I bet you do, you probably don't recognize it because it has different names in different places (for me, it's known as "pies ogrodnika" - "the dog of the gardener"). It's an old tale. https:/&#x2F
130.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
> if by regular people, you meant "in someone's personal life" Right, this is what I meant. I used "regular people" as shorthand for that, which I see wasn't a good choice. Next time around I'll be mo
131.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Maybe. I was referencing my own realization earlier today, when I was wondering if I can DYI a ground-penetrating radar to scan the allotment garden for hidden "surprises". A ground-penetrating radar is something I learned about a
132.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
The $200/mo version you're paying for today is the one that will be ~free for everyone in 6 months. You're only paying to use the bleeding edge of technology that improves so fast, and drops in costs so fast, that the entry-l
133.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
2. and 3. I agree with. 1. is mostly bullshit that's used by anti-AI crowd to gather further support. Data center companies did not stop caring about footprint, they're still pursuing that for the same reason they did it before: i
134.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
No, I don't think your opinion should be discounted. It just turns out that a bulk of open-source movement had ulterior motives, and were actually in this for credit or downstream opportunities, not to actually give things away in a pa
135.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
> Passkeys can also be shared with other people like spouses or friends, just like passwords. How? They're literally designed to not be, because they're trying to prevent phishing, and you cannot in general case distinguish p
136.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
I didn't want to bring up Aaron Swartz myself first, but now that you did and proved the point I did not want to post first, I nevertheless will: It's a cruel and sad irony that people invoke Aaron Swartz to argue directly opposit
137.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Of course you tell them, because you're nice person, and not jealous of someone else succeeding in a thing you aren't even pursuing? You wouldn't want to act like "the dog in the manger" from childhood stories.
138.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Android 17? If yes, then that's because they added a new permission specifically to block apps from LAN access, then bundled it together with "nearby devices" (one introduced earlier specifically to block Bluetooth and WiFi s
139.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
That's nice and I applaud you for attempting to solve it in a user-friendly way. Sadly, because that'll come off as unusual to 99%+ of your userbase, you'll probably face challenges explaining this to the users, and it'l
140.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
With passwords? No. With 2FA ? Yes. 2FA is almost just as stupid and almost just as bad for regular users as passkeys are, but it got adopted due to historical loophole - by far the most popular form was TOTP delivered via SMS, then "
141.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Who the fuck knows? I for sure don't. Websites only know there is a passkey associated with my account, and the OS only knows there might be one on the device, or maybe on another device, and offers me options to check here or do a B
142.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Not really that much in comparison to losing access when needed. It's relevant to corporate employees, where phishing is worthwhile to attackers, while losing access means creating a ticket on internal helpdesk and having rest of the d
143.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
> What is the average person’s threat model? Re-using passwords. Wrong. As article points out, it's not having access to their account. Followed by not being able to easily delegate access to their account to a trusted third party
144.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
Very solid points, and I love the focus on the fact that passkeys are addressing threats irrelevant to regular people, while ignoring those that matter. But I think it's still incomplete, because it's missing the biggest blind spo
145.
by TeMPOraL 22d ago
In 5 years, either $400,000 or $50 and a hammer, depending on whether the core piece of the process aligns with the needs of some fast-growing consumer tech product like e.g. drones.
146.
by TeMPOraL 23d ago
> A recent court ruling (in US) established that ONLY humans can be authors of copyrightable works. As a consequence of that assertion, it can be safely concluded that consumers of the copyrightable work MUST ONLY be humans as well. Th
147.
by TeMPOraL 23d ago
It's a shitty move, but ultimately, in between the bullshit narrative, they also did the thing - not you - so the promotion rightfully belongs to them. Execution trumps ideas, impact trumps raw effort, and such. Isn't this the e
148.
by TeMPOraL 23d ago
> the massive amount of books being destroyed Surely that's not about AI? Or you mean the small fraction of that that's result of "destructive format shift" process[0], which itself is a consequence of copyright re
149.
by TeMPOraL 23d ago
> but the S-curve will look like it for awhile. Yeah, S-curve should be classified as fallacy, because it rarely covers what people argue it does. Economic and technological growth is a stack of S-curves, where one very specific facet
150.
by TeMPOraL 23d ago
Also, The crowd: "Knowledge should be free! Culture belongs to all of us! Information must be democratized!" AI companies *proceed to copy literally everything and put it through virtual blender, until an universal general-purpose

More ›