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/)H
Posts
1
Comments
421
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • I don’t think so. Touchscreens were not at all common in 2001.

  • Heh, and the graphics can probably be managed on any low-end phone nowadays.

  • My wife just picked Black & White (2001) back up. That game has held up better than I’d ever have expected.

  • I think you’re thinking of Be Cool. The Rock was not in Get Shorty

  • two decades younger.

    We need somebody four decades younger than the current president.

  • Pillbugs here in the Midwest.

  • Username does not check out.

  • No, www needs to go the way of the dodo.

    Gotta love an abbreviation that is longer to say than the expansion

  • [citation needed].

    Just tried it, got told that it is not a valid command.

  • it just blithely demands an elevated runtime for no reason because its developers were morons.

    It’s always, always, this one.

  • There is no relevant distinction.

    I hate missiles for the damage they do regardless of the technology used to point them at the target.

    I hate cars for the damage they do regardless of the technology used to point them at the target.

    There’s a difference of intent (missiles get aimed at people while self driving cars hopefully get aimed away from people).

    There’s a difference of failure modes (when a self-driving car fails it will often hit a person while a failing missile will miss a person).

    But theres no reason to hate machine-learning for that, any more there is a reason to hate gyroscopes or lidar or other tools which are also used in guidance systems.

    If someone had decided that a simple accelerometer were “good enough” to unleash self-driving cars on the general public without consideration for the damage caused, people would be upset and rightly so, but not because of the specific technology itself.

    Edit: changed AI to “machine-learning”

  • The self-driving cars are not hatred of AI. Nobody* cares that they use machine-learning to enable the cars to drive themselves.

    It’s not hatred of AI there.

  • I think the hatred there is completely disconnected from the fact that it’s AI.

    Both of them have in common that the technology is being forced upon us at the cost of lives, livelihoods, and the environment upon which we all rely to survive.

  • Nobody* is talking about machine learning when they say “AI” these days. They mean LLMs and generative AI and especially the way it is being forced into everything and destroying the environment to do so.

    not literally; there is certainly at least one person out there who objects to machine learning, deep learning, or whatever you want to call it. However this is not the general sentiment.

  • For filth in a charging port, yeah.

  • I know. :-)

  • Not really relevant: power requirements would affect battery size much more than charging port size. And USB-C supports much greater power transport than the old dock connector.

  • Not conductive? Isn’t that a good thing?

  • I’m pretty sure the OP was being facetious to suggest Latin.