fedeb95

3 ms·

1.
by fedeb95 5d ago
I'm heuristically less prone to continue reading an article starting with a false dichotomy, that is between how you see things as an atheist vs as a person having faith.
2.
by fedeb95 5d ago
I like reading, and I read a lot. Still, I don't think it's right that a public service encourages reading. People must be free to do what they want in their free time, and this gamification stuff smells of imposing values and hab
3.
by fedeb95 5d ago
I don't agree. The real value of MCPs lays in providing a controlled interface to models. The benefits of control are multiple; models getting better means that, if necessary, they can go around the limitations, but generally their adh
4.
by fedeb95 16d ago
In order to understand why this is pushed, consider that maps through history rarely have been only a tool for the technician. Maps usually conveyed a lot of social information, take a look at medieval ones to understand the point. This exp
5.
by fedeb95 16d ago
We are in 2026: why not a rotating globe?
6.
by fedeb95 16d ago
I remember clearly Apple fans making fun of Samsung when they did their foldable phone.
7.
by fedeb95 17d ago
very cool, but no matter how I twist it, when zooming I zoom only on the testicles.
8.
by fedeb95 17d ago
No one, but history tells us this isn't a problem. Publishers will still want to pay you in order to have the opportunity to be the first to the market with the copies, and this is what makes a lot of money under the assumption your wo
9.
by fedeb95 17d ago
that's correct, I am against copyright in any form of sorts. I know this is unpopular, but I really can't think of a logical argument that justifies it (I have read plenty; luckily I have no decision making power). Copyright in my
10.
by fedeb95 17d ago
I think the troubling mindset is that of who accuses strangers on the internet of misbehaving without knowing their opinions. Software doesn't need any protection. People want protection.
11.
by fedeb95 17d ago
this is bullshit, your data is protected by privacy laws and not copyright laws.
12.
by fedeb95 17d ago
I don't agree. Free software would still be free even if copyright were to be abolished, if anything it would flourish further. That is because even proprietary software could be better integrated.
13.
by fedeb95 18d ago
1) costs? 2) profits/costs?
14.
by fedeb95 19d ago
it includes an anti-urination idea for outdoors, which may be worth noting.
15.
by fedeb95 19d ago
There is a false dichotomy here. There are people who view code as "art", in the sense outlined here, and yet rely on LLMs for some tasks.
16.
by fedeb95 23d ago
I've always loved audacity, but have always found its editing workflow to be hard to use. This seems an improvement. P.S.: I don't care for looks, but UX seems better. I will try it.
17.
by fedeb95 26d ago
that's very true for reviews of products, the classical five stars. Even with comments, they are seldom more than a data point, and stars themselves are given with very different meanings by different people. So when reviewing reviews,
18.
by fedeb95 1mo ago
the point is that almost nobody will read the book just to verify an internet comment. If you can provide some resources cited in the book it would be better... but this reasoning can be applied to 99% of comments here. At least you provide
19.
by fedeb95 1mo ago
This happens nearly every year in Italy. Someone said that it's because we humans are very good at reacting at immediate danger and very bad at reacting at risks building up slowly. I don't know if it is true, but by today still v
20.
by fedeb95 1mo ago
Now we just need to add x402 and we have a startup.
21.
by fedeb95 1mo ago
I think you should provide better use case scenarios that make clear why this project is useful. I can already change AC and lock doors with two buttons, why it should be better to do it by voice? Pressing those buttons is way faster. I gue
22.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
That's why I have two remotes origin --> codeberg github --> github I may add others. Redundancy is a good thing.
23.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
because on one hand you have many citizens that hardly can organize themselves and with few resources, on the other a big company funded by other big companies. The law isn't the same for everyone.
24.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
It is open, but they open it for you.
25.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
They are basically trying to pursue a model copyright. That's funny, because they made their models exactly because of open stuff on the web. But they will loose this battle. There is no way to technically avoid open models to be creat
26.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
wait just three more months and software engineers will be out of job on time.
27.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
humans are way better at managing big contexts than a machine. The human mind is way more complex than any AI model + infrastructure.
28.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
the point I see is that even if you automate all that is possible to automate, there are some core activities that can't be delegated to machines in order for a product to feel very good. May it be the design, or whatever: I don't
29.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
this is about open hardware. You really don't need to build a Kobo clone. By being open, you can fit your needs. If your needs are already covered by Kobo, that's fine.
30.
by fedeb95 2mo ago
I can't believe someone shares my point of view. We have already many non humanoid robots to do boring stuff (underwater maintenance, stuff like that). For some reasons people tend to think that for robots to do stuff close to humans,

More ›