My gut reaction is that this won’t work long-term. Users on youtube often point to specific timestamps in a video in comments or link to specific timestamps when sharing videos, meaning there needs to be some way to identify the timestamp excluding ads. And if there’s a way to do that there’s a way to detect ads.
Of course, there’s always the chance they just scrap these features despite how useful they are and how commonly they’re used; they’ve done similar before.
There’s no point looking for logic. These people truly believe granting a licence restricts the rights of people who don’t agree to the licence, which is the exact opposite of what licenses do. It’s blatant misinformation but if you call them out on it (even by quoting their own link) they literally think you’re an astroturfer for AI, because that makes more sense to them than the fact they’re obviously wrong.
That link is a 404 so I can’t tell what it says, but here’s a 1996 US act to enforce net neutrality: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996
And here’s a 2006 Tim Berners-Lee blog post about threats to net neutrality which specifically says net neutrality already exists, you really can’t get much more authoritive than that: https://web.archive.org/web/20060703142912/http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/144
Obama may have enacted some legislation around between neutrality (again, your link 404s so I can’t tell what specifically you’re referring to) but it certainly wasn’t created under Obama.
The concept of net neutrality definitely existed long before Obama so it’s a bit questionable to say it was created under him. Did anything specific happen under him to enforce net neutrality more than it already was?
You’re definitely right about Trump though. It seems like he took every opportunity to screw over the US public in favour of corporate interests.
The name is an analogy, neural networks do not work in the same way as biological neurons. They were designed by computer scientists, not biologists.
RAM is so far removed from biological short term memory both in how it works and how it’s used that the comparison doesn’t even make sense. The only similarity is that they’re short term information/data stores, so it’s equally valid to compare them to a drawing in the sand of a beach.
A keyboard without tactile feedback is objectively worse than a keyboard with tactile feedback, excluding other factors.
I’ve never had a physical keyboard lag out then send an entirely different keystroke because it thought I held a button, or send a single keystroke because I was typing too quickly.
I’ve never had to wait a moment for a physical keyboard to show up after selecting a text box.
I’ve never had the entire layout of a page shift to make room for a physical keyboard whenever I select or deselect a text box.
I’ve never had a physical keyboard prevent me from using the number pad and force me to use the full keyboard (or worse, vice versa) because of an improperly configured input box.
The way I see it there are exactly two real benefits to integrating a software keyboard into a touchscreen: reduced physical complexity (the entire device is essentially just one screen), and easier access to emoji. A touchscreen keyboard performs far worse as a keyboard. It’s a valid trade-off for a small mobile device, but it’s not objectively better.
It’s a bit of a non-sequitur though, the context was denying service to an ally not cutting off existing service to Crimea. It’s like if someone asked “Have you ever shaken a baby” and you respond “I have never kicked this baby!”. Sure, it’s good that you haven’t kicked a baby, but that’s just not the question.
They’ll use old comments either way, using an up-to-date dataset means using a dataset already tainted by LLM-generated content. Training a model on its own output is not great.
Incidentally this also makes Lemmy data less valuable, most of Lemmy’s popularity came after the rise of LLMs so there’s no significant untainted data from before LLMs.
It’s not just repeated moves, a draw can be called if the board is in the same state 3 times at all during the game; if you get to the same position 3 times using different moves that still counts, even if it was a white move the first two times and a black move the third.
The game also ends after 50 moves with no captures or pawn moves so you can’t play indefinitely by just avoiding those board states. Interestingly those two moves also make it impossible to return to a previous board state (pawns can’t move backwards, extra pieces are never added) so if you’re enforcing both rules in code you can safely discard previous board states every time you reset the move counter.
Or you could say “and were shocked at the results”! It’s nice of you to highlight how people communicate differently even with a shared language, the world would be so boring if everyone was the same.
Your mistake there is thinking the stock market has to make sense. For instance, mass layoffs are a huge red flag that a company is failing and in any sane world would instantly tank the value. The stock market instead likes layoffs because it’s not at all interested in what the company actually does, so spending a little less in the short term to produce a lot less long term is a good thing.
You’re not wrong, but the first words are literally “Just over a decade ago”. It’s not a news article, it’s the story of the research in 2013 which revealed bitcoin isn’t anonymous.
Ctrl+Shift+V pastes without formatting.
Sort of, but only if you’re launching through Steam. You can launch DRM-free Steam games through the executable file without launching Steam if you already have the files downloaded.
Games on Steam don’t require Steamworks or any other DRM, if your game won’t launch without Steam running that’s a choice by the game developer and not a restriction imposed for Steam.
What a ridiculous argument. They’re not saying big tech companies are necessarily as abusive as those other organisations, they’re saying people might want to avoid them in the same way.
By contrast your comment, intentionally or otherwise, suggests the only valid reason to avoid interacting with an organisation is if you were literally raped by them. Now that is fucked up.
You’re already paying for a car because your infrastructure demands one. I’m not in the US and get by just fine without one. Saves me a shitload of money too.
Cycling is unsafe because your infrastructure was built exclusively for cars. Your infrastructure is built exclusively for cars because most people have to use cars because your infrastructure was built exclusively for cars. It’s circular reasoning.
Both of those issues are caused by infrastructure and would be solved by building slightly less stupid infrastructure.
In place of cookies, Google has introduced a new set of tools that makes the Chrome browser itself keep tabs on what you’re doing online.
So instead of cookies which can be blocked or deleted relatively simply there’s spyware baked directly into the browser. How is this an improvement for the user?
I think there’s a simpler reason; if you embed ads as part of the video linking to a specific timestamp becomes a nightmare. One person might have no ad, another might have a 30 second ad, and a third might have 5 minutes of ad. Attempting to link to a time after the ad would give three different timestamps, and loading that timestamp could give you the clip you want or could drop you right in the middle of an ad.
To solve that issue you’d need some way for the client to determine the “true” timestamp, but then you’re also giving ad blockers a way to determine where the ad is so you’re back to square one.
That’s nonsense. If I were to say you’re spreading Nazi propaganda but I refuse to show anyone for fear of spreading hate, should people believe me?
If you actually were a Nazi would it be better for me to expose you with proof or would it be better to make unsubstantiated claims with plenty of room for doubt?
I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that language models are effective lie detectors, it’s very widely known that LLMs have no concept of truth and hallucinate constantly.
And that’s before we even get into inherent biases and moral judgements required for any form of truth detection.