A company “accusing” someone of piracy isn’t proof. Access to the internet is almost essential these days. If you can prove a person is pirating prosecute them under the law with fines or even incarceration if warranted. But stripping internet access from someone shouldn’t be seen as an acceptable punishment for a free citizen anyway.

Whoever owns the network attached to the IP address also shouldn’t be responsible for actions of every user. Let’s ban an entire company, college, or government institution from the internet because an IP showed up on a list… dumb ruling.

Again I’m in favor of choosing browsers on install, but lots of Chrome installs on Windows is not the same as being the default.

So much so that you even get this annoying popup from Edge when you try to download Chrome with Edge - which should be against the rules imo.

I agree with going after the Edge Lords and making things more fair…but I’m guessing Chrome is the most used we browser by a long shot even on windows so the “No platform independent browser can aspire to match Edge’s unparalleled distribution advantage on Windows." part feels like users are comfortable stepping over Edge’s corpse to download chrome anyway.

~laughs in firefox~

People think emulator protections in the law are stronger than they really are. Sony vs Connectix made emulation legal, but it wasn’t heard by the supreme court. PS1 games weren’t encrypted and relied on other methods like disc wobble to prevent piracy…so without proactively violating any measures you could just not include that check in your competing emulator and play retail discs without breaking any laws.

In steps the DMCA anti-circumvention laws for bypassing video game / console encryption measures, which is an even bigger untested minefield without precedent in favor of emulation. And since games are default encrypted on new consoles and arguably not subject to exemption (at least while still supported) it really might be a disaster to fight it.

Nintendo is a dick but it’s not in our interest or theirs to really push the boundary on the status quo. The get to slap suit whatever they want taken down, we get to play the emulation hydra game where it’s still legally grey.

Over simplification but partly it has to do with how LLMs split language into tokens and some of those tokens are multi-letter. To us when we look for R’s we split like S - T - R - A - W - B - E - R - R - Y where each character is a token, but LLMs split it something more like STR - AW - BERRY which makes predicting the correct answer difficult without a lot of training on the specific problem. If you asked it to count how many times STR shows up in “strawberrystrawberrystrawberry” it would have a better chance.

I’d love to debate politics with you but first tell me how many r’s are in the word strawberry. (AI models are starting to get that answer correct now though)

Mods could just make a filter to remove everything new anyway. The concept of mods being unpaid volunteers means they get to fuck with reddit if they really want. They already had that issue with some subs just starting to allow porn during the first api protest. Sure reddit can just churn through to newer friendlier mods like the first time but they’re not going to be able to crush all the dissent and drama from moves like that.

But actually I think reddit has a bigger problem than protests. They tweaked their algorithm recently and it is going the way of facebook now, I’ve been getting 0 upvote day-old posts shown to me. They’re probably getting more engagement but I don’t think redditors are going to put up with that level of enshittification as easily as other social media where people are locked in by friends and followers.

Open AI has a projected revenue of 3 Billion this year.
It is currently projected to burn 8 Billion on training costs this year.
Now it needs 5 Gigawatt data centers worth over 100 Billion.
And new fabs worth 7 Trillion to supply all the chips.

I get that it’s trying to dominate a new market but that’s ludicrous. And even with everything so far they haven’t really pulled far ahead of competing models like Claude and Gemini who are also training like crazy.

deleted by creator

They definitely do, especially legacy stuff that’s still kicking. Sweet, sweet tech debt that you hope won’t be a real problem until you’ve moved to a different company.

I’ve used word/onenote or FOSS equivalents the same way, they’re fine as a scratchpad for notes. As you said it’s nice being able to shove images in there. There are so many things that don’t belong anywhere else that I will forget after even a half hour break.

People in this thread don’t seem to understand how anti big business the FTC has been since Lina Khan was appointed. These reports are meant to be used by congress to help guide real policy. It’s one thing to just assume social media is violating privacy, it’s another thing to have a facts-based report on exactly what is currently happening.

Of course the FTC needs new laws to do any enforcement and there’s probably not enough anti corporation politicians to pass laws that give them real teeth on data privacy issues.

deleted by creator

I’m doing my part by writing really shitty foss projects for AI to steal and train on.

Now that the Steam Deck and linux gaming has found some success I really hope Valve or someone else revisits the home console market with a similar approach.

You couldn’t really build a PC for the same price as a PS5 with the same performance unless you’re buying used parts in most places but that’s not because Sony is selling consoles at a loss right now like the olden days. A large system integrator like Valve (or xbox if they want to change their formula) could offer similar perf/price without all the downsides of these locked down consoles.

It’s non just Facebook either. Every big tech social media platform has headed in this direction of showing you stuff you don’t really want to see based on maximizing profit. For-profit social media seems to mostly be doomed to this outcome because it makes more money.

A restaurant has a sign that says “no shirt no shoes no service”. I walk in barefoot and order a burger. They serve me the burger. They had the right to deny me but they served me anyway. The responsibly to enforce their own terms of service is on them. Similarly youtube has the right to deny service to people blocking ads and sometimes does. That does not make ad blocking piracy for all intents and purposes. The onus to enforce their own terms of service is on them. And it would be very easy for them to take more drastic measures but they don’t.

I get that you’re trying to make an argument that morally it can feel like piracy, but it’s just not actually piracy. No copyright was violated. Youtube’s TOS doesn’t change that.

Linus wasn’t accused of sexually harassing anyone. His company was accused of being a hostile work environment with sexual harassment by a former worker, but the accusations weren’t against Linus himself. LTT hired a 3rd party law firm to investigate - LTT said the law firm basically said there wasn’t legal liability based on the documentation they could find and LTT used that to absolve themselves and threaten to sue the accuser if she said anything else.

But this was an LTT hired lawfirm and LTT themselves reporting on what the report said - and since it’s confidential you kind of just have to take their word that they’re accurately reporting the findings. Further there were initially some corroborators of Madison’s story who retracted and apologized quickly (assumingly after being threatened with legal action - Aprime is the example). Besides that a lot of the accusations were things that happened in person that wouldn’t necessarily leave a digital trail so it’s possible even if the 3rd party investigation was completely unbiased that everything Madison said was still true.

In the end believe what you want but it seems slimy enough that I stopped watching.

It’s like a free booth that offers products and says donations welcome. It legally is not stealing if you take a free product and don’t give a donation. The enrichment of the creator legally has nothing to do with whether skipping ads is piracy. The creator has the option to stop offering their content for free in the future if they don’t like the money they’re getting from the amount of people watching the ads.