pxoe

21 ms·

241.
by pxoe 3y ago
teens won't just 'want' privacy, they will get it, one way or another. and if it means excluding other people (like parents) from their communication loops, then so be it. thinking that 'you can let them know that you re
242.
by pxoe 3y ago
that imposition of a lack of privacy just seems like a sure way to not only make them seek actual privacy elsewhere - moving their communications to other devices, and just doing stuff outside of "surveilled" devices or any device
243.
by pxoe 3y ago
got 'superthinness'. uhhhh ok https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/superthin and just a bunch of words, that are kinda existing (handgunner? honeycake? etc), but it's just 'making up a new def
244.
by pxoe 3y ago
sounds like you're avoiding paying creators and just making up 'rationales' for continuing to not support them. if you're unwilling to support creators and unwilling to participate in creator economy and creator platform
245.
by pxoe 3y ago
you say "objectively" a lot when most of what you write seems to be just overly emotional flashy wringing
246.
by pxoe 3y ago
this seeming belief that activitypub - or rather, mastodon - is be-all end-all and the only thing that anybody should be concerned with and cater to, is kinda off-putting personally I hope it doesn't actually become "the one thin
247.
by pxoe 3y ago
it's rambly, but it's still not clear 'what is it that they want from the internet'. "you could find a point in there somewhere, but really, you had to"
248.
by pxoe 3y ago
"free database", except the images in it may not be so "free". even their "open" 400M dataset makes a caveat like "if we found a CC license, we put it there, otherwise, well, we just don't know."
249.
by pxoe 3y ago
they're operating while ignoring and violating copyrights and licenses, and opening themselves to a possibility of a lawsuit. there's getty v stability so we're gonna find out.
250.
by pxoe 3y ago
Scanning apps for malware, preventing them from being installed or run, and warning about malicious apps, doesn't actually require centralized distribution or limiting sideloading. This malware problem with sideloading has already been
251.
by pxoe 3y ago
>definitely money now wait, so it wasn't money before? when they ran all those ads and did all of that 'we're the only privacy company' marketing? i guess it worked really well. when some of it was kinda just, reframi
252.
by pxoe 3y ago
the whole insistence on going with what they believe in, 'social apps bad' (and kinda just that, not really going deeper into 'what are the interactions', etc.), just makes this seem kinda off (and gives a 'collabor
253.
by pxoe 3y ago
>no space to be yourself not only there are multiple spaces to be yourself within, you can be yourself in different ways and under different identities. there's "side profiles", "finstas", etc., there's more
254.
by pxoe 4y ago
besides whether artists should get paid or not, or whether they should be reimbursed for use of their art or not, using something without permission, or rights, or license, without something that'd actually (legally) enable to do so wi
255.
by pxoe 4y ago
the lengths techbros will go for in order to avoid paying an artist for artwork as well as, doing all that nn/ml stuff, instead of just, trying to learn a bit of how to make an artwork themselves, how to draw something, even by tracing
256.
by pxoe 4y ago
twitter has a bunch of 'conversation quality' features that they've amassed over time and which now make up their 'expertise' on this kind of social media format. and yes, that includes stuff like quote tweets, whic
257.
by pxoe 4y ago
>someone could surely argue No, they could not. Even if they did, those things are just different. It won't change what AI/ML is, a bunch of bytes in memory and on a disk. Just making a bunch of reaching comparisons, won't
258.
by pxoe 4y ago
HN has native ads now?
259.
by pxoe 4y ago
if microsoft and (particularly) google are "speedy" in this, then what the open (open source, etc.) projects (like stable diffusion) are? the level of 'whatever, we don't really care, whatever happens, happens, just ship
260.
by pxoe 4y ago
well, it's not like windows is too far off - on my w10 install, c:/windows/ comes up to about 280k files. (and in total, that small-ish system drive, 40 gb, has about 380k files on it. i'd imagine macos has numbers that
261.
by pxoe 4y ago
real harm: erosion of intellectual property, as AI projects peruse works, including those with licenses and copyrights, without any regard to their license or copyright. and before tech bros clap for "IP as a concept should be destroye
262.
by pxoe 4y ago
in their case, 'fair use' seems more fair - stuff like images, if it's a copyrighted work, are featured as a small resolution thumbnail. meanwhile, AI services (image generating ones) grab a high resolution copy off the inter
263.
by pxoe 4y ago
a headset is not a suit of AI products. it's kinda...irrelevant. meta has a headset, and that's working out great for them, isn't it. so far, there's nothing. there's only vague rumors, or not even - just assumption
264.
by pxoe 4y ago
at least it's on the web (and there are ways around that) and not just 'a service/feature that is very specifically either tailored to a place, has some specific region-dependent requirements, or just physically only availabl
265.
by pxoe 4y ago
it's pretty damn exciting to see google actually introduce a product like that, on the web, broadly available, for once. it feels like it's been a hot minute since something got introduced like this from them. cause it's all
266.
by pxoe 4y ago
ups for vergecast, it's like an overview of what's going on in tech, it's current, insightful, but also fun and humorous.
267.
by pxoe 4y ago
"“We were wrong. Flat out, we were wrong. If you believe, as we do, that at some point, AI — AGI — is going to be extremely, unbelievably potent, then it just does not make sense to open-source. It is a bad idea" sounds like someo
268.
by pxoe 4y ago
well, imagine you're selling your merchandise on a marketplace, but then some other company comes around, takes your product design, and then sells a product very similar to yours, at a slightly lower price. even if they get a slightly
269.
by pxoe 4y ago
people give flak to google for their "don't be evil" motto (and their inoffensive, "friendly" and colorful branding) to this day, so this is just fine. wondering about what happened to some company's initial or
270.
by pxoe 4y ago
Also, wonder how many people confuse OpenAI as being a "product" of some other big company, like Google, or Microsoft. Their branding is just that nondescript. (or maybe it's just me lol.) Though, now that Google has been ver

More ›