Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)G

General_Effort

@ General_Effort @lemmy.world

Posts
93
Comments
1020
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Can we trust LLM CALCULATIONS?.

    Jump

  • Probably, depending on the context. It is possible that all 6 models were trained on the same misleading data, but not very likely in general.

    Number crunching isn't an obvious LLM use case, though. Depending on the task, having it create code to crunch the numbers, or a step-by-step tutorial on how to derive the formula, would be my preference.

  • Elon Musk’s X calls for delay in Australia’s child social media ban citing ‘serious concerns’ about policy’s lawfulness

    Jump

  • so collecting votes from the many

    All the notable socialist states, Soviet Russia, Red China, Cuba, arose out of a "2nd amendment solution to tyranny", as might be said in the US.

    The term "socialist" can be used in a much broader sense, but then the meaning is really unclear. I mean, you could call the US a socialist state. The left-wing revolutionaries, who founded it, claimed that all are born equal and fought a war to expropriate the rightfully inherited rights of the king. They even created a constitution to promote the general Welfare without even mentioning the protection of property.

  • Elon Musk’s X calls for delay in Australia’s child social media ban citing ‘serious concerns’ about policy’s lawfulness

    Jump

  • The original left/right distinction dates back to the French Revolution. During a brief episode, supporters of the monarchy found themselves sitting on the right and opponents (republicans and anarchists) on the left.

    Later, the term conservatism was applied to the ideas of Edmund Burke, who defended a kind of constitutional monarchy.

    In that sense, the US founding fathers were radical left-wing revolutionaries. However, that happened a bit before the French Revolution, so the term is anachronistic.

    WW1 broke the power of monarchies in much of Europe. Fascism rose in the interwar period between WW1 and WW2 as a kind of Ersatz-Monarchy. The fascist leader did not present himself as the true heir to the throne, but as a man of the people. He did not claim his position "by the grace of god", but might invoke "providence". As such, a stout monarchist might genuinely call fascism left-wing. They would also think the US Republicans are left-wing extremists; at least insofar as the Republicans are republican.

    Since fascism is in many ways similar to the more authoritarian versions of monarchism, fascist leaders gained the support of old monarchists. There weren't many of those around, but they still controlled key positions in government and industry. You were not a high military office, government official, or plain rich, if you had not kowtowed to the king.

    Because of all the overt similarities in ideology, demographic support, and policy, fascism has always been considered a right wing ideology by any normal observer.

  • Elon Musk’s X calls for delay in Australia’s child social media ban citing ‘serious concerns’ about policy’s lawfulness

    Jump

  • Whats a tankie btw?

    Originally, these were western supporters of soviet/russian imperialism. Soviet imperialism was very much a seamless continuation of tsarist imperialism.

    After WW2, Soviet Russia had military control of much of Europe. They installed authoritarian governments that were under their control, but of course there were occasional reform movements, notably in Hungary 1956 or Czechoslovakia 1968. Russia crushed these "revolts" with overwhelming military force. They sent in the tanks, and so those who favored military aggression were called "tankies".

    Note: These were regular wars between countries by any definition.

  • What do you think about the protocol behind Bluesky, ATproto, and how do you think it compares to ActivityPub?

    Jump

  • The Fediverse is fine as it is. But some people hope that it is the future of social media which isn't likely at all.

    The Fediverse is called decentralized because no one instance has a majority of users. But the only way to make sure that this state continues is if the most popular instances close registration for new users. That's an easy choice to make for the volunteers running instances. More users mean more expense and more work. That's what I mean by choices. A growth-oriented company would not do that.

    I don't see what's so special about being able to make new accounts. You can do that anywhere. What you can't do is take your followers, communities, or posting history with you. For many people, that is not acceptable, and not just influencers, for whom their accounts are their business capital. That's a big part of what enables social media monopolies.

    I don't see how the Fediverse solves any of the problems with social media. The hobbyist driven Fediverse isn't going to take off. Any professional, growth-oriented instance would have all the familiar problems.

  • What do you think about the protocol behind Bluesky, ATproto, and how do you think it compares to ActivityPub?

    Jump

  • AP is a standard for letting servers communicate, while ATP is that and more. You could build what ATP does on top of AP, or make both compatible. What matters is really the communities and ecosystems behind these protocols.

    AP is behind the Fediverse. The basic building block of the Fediverse is the instance. Every instance is its own self-contained, centralized social media service, that optionally federates with other instances via ActivityPub. There is nothing about AP that encourages decentralization. To the contrary, the way things work rn encourages centralization (but that's pretty technical).

    Case in point, Trump's Truth Social is a Mastodon instance that choses not to federate. If it was open for federation, the Fediverse would look quite different. Or perhaps more likely, most other instances would choose to defederate.

    I explain this because a few weeks ago, there were some posts pitching the Fediverse as decentralized social media. But the Fediverse is what it is because the people running the servers choose to do things a certain way. This is not a result of technical or legal features.

    @Proto is the result of a project to make Twitter decentralized. That is, not a decentralized alternative, but actual Twitter with all its users. We might never have heard much about it if Musk had not taken the wrecking ball to Twitter. The team created Bluesky as a proof of concept.

    Current social media companies have monopoly power over their users. @Proto seeks to structure social media in such a way that that is impossible. It is quite sophisticated. Improvements may be possible, but it certainly is good enough to solve the technical aspect of social media monopolies. Of course, the technical part was never the hard part. We will see if the economics work out. But the real challenge is the legal angle.

  • Can you think of any now?

    Jump

  • Huh. TIL.

  • What is the craziest thing your pet thinks you can control?

    Jump

  • That just seems like a perfectly reasonable misunderstanding.

  • What do you think: should all government software be open source?

    Jump

  • Estonia: digital government services with open and auditable APIs.

    What makes an API auditable?

  • Internet Archive’s big battle with music publishers ends in settlement

    Jump

  • It just seems odd to me, you know? AI in the hands of the few is harmful, but if they pay license fees, that can be allowed. Copyright infringement is theft, but it is acceptable if the result is shared freely. I don't really see how that works.

  • Internet Archive’s big battle with music publishers ends in settlement

    Jump

  • Why do you want it to work that way?

  • Internet Archive’s big battle with music publishers ends in settlement

    Jump

  • Good audiobooks

    Jump

  • It's hilarious, but far from the classic sci-fi OP is looking for.

  • AI Designs Viable Bacteriophage Genomes, Combats Antibiotic Resistance

    Jump

  • It's interesting how it is seen the other way around in other contexts.

  • AI Designs Viable Bacteriophage Genomes, Combats Antibiotic Resistance

    Jump

  • ActivityPub vs RSS Atom etc. Why Federate instead of aggrigate?

    Jump

  • Many things are fundamentally feasible. I see 2 things you argue for.

    One is changing the caching strategy. I don't think that's wise in terms of load sharing, but certainly feasible on a small scale. In certain circumstances, it may be preferred.

    The other thing is using older protocols and standards. The practical reason to do this would be to use existing tooling, libraries, code. I'm not seeing such opportunities. I'm not that familiar with these, but it seems like they would have to be extended anyway. So I don't really see the point.

  • ActivityPub vs RSS Atom etc. Why Federate instead of aggrigate?

    Jump

  • At a minimum this is adding the number of instances that federate a given content streams to the multiple of storage needed to host the content, even if that storage is ephemeral. Not so big a problem at 100,000 users, but at 100,000,000 users this is a lot of storage cost we are talking about. Unless somehow the user/client doesnt cache the content they pull from an instance locally on their device when they view it?

    Worry more about the bandwidth. Your instance would have to serve your content to all these 100M users. The way it is, much of the load goes to the instance where a user is registered. That means that an instance can control hosting costs by closing registrations.

    My point was this isn’t an issue when all content is self-hosted, because the author as the host can edit, delete, or migrate all they want and maintain full direct control over the source of that content the client interacts with whenever a pull request comes in. Yes the user Caches the content when they read it, but there is no intermediary copy.

    There's the fundamental problem. What you think of as "your" data, other people think of as "their" data. That can't be resolved. What's worse is that controlling "your" data requires controlling other people's computers and devices, as with DRM.

  • Dude... Who the hell wrote all this cr@#?

    Jump

  • Almost?

  • Microsoft doesn't understand the Fediverse

    Jump

  • Toronto cash seems to avoid the “not incentivice illegal usage”, and after a quick check it seems to be almost it’s sole reason to be, please correct me if I’m mistaken here.

    I'm not familiar with the details. The point is simply, don't expect to get away with playing games.

    Seems like the EU Safe Harbor Provisions, you basically must not incentivice illegal hosting, accept takedown requests, but also have some sort of procedure for the takedown requests. Which all seem quite easy to follow and adhere to and would function perfectly for Tenfingers IMO.

    Yes, but there is more. The DSA is written in a very convoluted way, with the exceptions for smaller platforms scattered here and there. I don't remember what exactly applies here. You may also have obligations under the DMA, CRA, and quite probably the GDPR.