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/)B
Posts
1
Comments
179
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • It really is pretty weird. ... and interesting. I don't necessarily think the existence of filibusters is a bad thing, but it definitely a very weird thing.

  • Are you suggesting that this particular type of CP should be acceptable? (And suddenly "but I used AI" becomes a popular defence.)

  • I've been using OsmAnd for years, and offline maps has always been one of their main things.

  • Something bizarre is happening to media organizations that use 'clicks' as a core metric.

  • As someone who has taught many children how to use excel, the new AI features make using it easier but teaching and learning harder. A lot of stuff now happens automagically, and that makes it harder to see the reasons and structures and language of how it is meant to work. So doing basic stuff is now trivially easy, but learning to become competent enough to do more creative and advanced stuff is more difficult.

  • Thanks for the suggestion. I'll check out Rnote sometime soon.

    (As I said, I do like the writing & drawing features of xournal++; and so I've been doing a bit of basic file / folder organising with that already; but it certainly isn't as easily browseable as OneNote.)

  • Part of my point is that a lot of everyday rules do break down at large scale. Like, 'drink water' is good advice - but a person can still die from drinking too much water. And having a few people go for a walk through a forest is nice, but having a million people go for a walk through a forest is bad. And using a couple of quotes from different sources to write an article for a website is good; but using thousands of quotes in an automated method doesn't really feel like the same thing any more.

    That's what I'm saying. A person can't physically read billions of books, or do the statistical work to put them together to create a new piece of work from them. And since a person cannot do that, no law or existing rule currently takes that possibility into account. So I don't think we can really say that a person is 'allowed to' do that. Rather, it's just an undefined area. A person simply cannot physically do it, and so the rules don't have to consider it. On the other hand, computer systems can now do it. And so rather than pointing to old laws, we have to decide as a society whether we think that's something we are ok with.

    I don't know what the 'best' answer is, but I do think we should at least stop to think about it carefully; because there are some clear downsides that need to be considered - and probably a lot of effects that aren't as obvious which should also be considered!

  • Do you know someone who's read a billion books and can write a new (trashy) book in 5 mins?

  • I'm very interested in OneNote alternatives. I've been using OneNote for longer than I've disliked Microsoft... and I still think it's a good app. Pretty much the only thing I don't like about OneNote is the increasingly close integration with Windows accounts. I'd rather my notes were not scanned and uploaded and processed by a US mega-corp...

    Anyway, people keep suggesting stuff like Joplin. But that isn't even vaguely close to OneNote in terms of stylus and inking. For me, inking is the main core feature. And so in terms of alternatives, xournal++ is a closer fit. (xournal++ has essentially no organisational structure for notes; but it is really great for inking.)

    What I'd really like is basically the organisational structure of Joplin (or whatever other alternative) + the inking power of xournal++. And ideally being able to import my vast amounts of handwritten OneNote work! -- But that last bit is probably too much to ask.

  • Hmm. I wonder if Aquaman is in the market for some old computers.

  • It's like Moore's law. The number of bytes for a basic app doubles every 2.5 years.

    When I was young, we'd get a few different games games on a single 1.4 Mb floppy disk. The games were simpler, sure, but exactly the same games now would be far bigger in bytes.

  • yeah, me too. Fortunately that has never ever happened.

  • Here is a recent Lemmy post highlighting some of the issues that women commonly face in US universities. It's largely about inclusivivity. Lots of good progress has been made in recent times to fix problems of that type, but there is still some way to go.

    Unfortunately, the new US president is strongly against that kind of progress. He has gone out of his way to roll back and block anything that might look like an inclusivity boosting program. Quite clearly, the USA is now moving backwards in these issues.

    So that's what the comment in the post is about. Note that we're just reading some random guy's off-hand comment about an advertisement. So it isn't an in-depth analysis. It's a highly simplified message. But I hope you can at least see what we're talking about.

  • Do you honestly not get it, or are you just trying to push back against a message you don't like?

  • terrible choice of link. There was a stack of reporting from various tech-news sites and blogs; but you've given as the nazi site.

  • It really is a shitty take. Mozilla are essentially saying they depend on Google remaining a monopoly; and that we shouldn't fight the bad guys because the bad guys might hurt us if we try.

    The Mozilla blog post was all about the DOJ asking to end search-bar payments, and how this might hurt independent browser. But I saw no mention of the DOJ saying that Google must sell Chrome; which I think is very relevant to the discussion about browser dominance.

    More and more I believe that Mozilla's current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.

  • Need more advertising in Firefox to keep pumping those exec salaries.

  • The opposition party could obviously be better, but I think they were strong enough that "no preference" wasn't the right choice. (After all, choosing not to vote is essentially a vote that says "I don't care who wins".)

  • Previously I thought almost all of them were, but then I found out that someone I've known for years hold that view. Any mention that maybe voting for the democrats would be a good idea results in an angry speech about genocide; which somehow (I'm not sure how) even has them lean towards Trump.

    I appreciate the staunch opposition to genocide. But its kind of weird to see someone take a single issue so strongly to heart that their reasoning ends up inverted such that the candidate they favour is worse even on their one issue.