Telorand

Oof, that's rough.

The main maintainer of curl recently encountered a similar thing. Some users had used their own models to find and report hundreds of potential errors (and were open about using those tools when asked). After review, the maintainers incorporated around 40% of the suggested fixes, some being actual breaks and some being semantic QoL fixes. He was surprised that an AI might actually be useful for something like that.

But in the whole process, there was a human reviewing and checking the work. At no point were these fixes just taken as gospel, and even the reporters were using their own specialized models for this task. I think introducing AI-powered analysis isn't necessarily a bad thing, but relying upon public models and cutting out humans anywhere in the review and application process is a recipe for disaster.

The !selfhosted@lemmy.world community has lots of info and helpful people!

It very much depends on your local laws. Despite the current administration, the law in the US, for example, is that you do not have to divulge passwords (a Fifth Amendment right to silence). You can hand over your entire encrypted database intact, no destruction needed, and unless the authorities can decrypt it, it's useless evidence in court. Prosecutors may still try to build a case without that evidence (as you pointed out by getting decrypted correspondence with an accomplice), but it's not illegal to hand over encrypted data, even if they demand that you decrypt it; you are under no legal obligation to help incriminate yourself.

That right may not exist in other countries, so as always, one should know their individual rights and threat model.

Right. The point is that they're not going to do you any favors with regard to the law. They have zero incentive to fight the law on your behalf, because your relationship is purely transactional.

Another way to say it is, "No company is going to break the law for you."

For all questions: your own.

Every company has to comply with the laws of the country in which they operate, and no company is going to go to jail for you. There's other encrypted email providers, but they will still have to abide by their local laws. The best you can hope for is that they have minimal data on you and that anything potentially incriminating is encrypted and can only be decrypted by you.

I don't care to find the source right now, but around the time when the OLED came out, the battery performance was nominally better in third-party tests. It did come down to specifics in what you played (game optimization) and how you set the power profiles, but the extra battery didn't add much in terms of playtime—maybe an hour extra in real world use cases.

I don't know if that's still the case; it could be that Valve has OLED specific improvements by this point, but I suspect that it still would not be a significant enough point for someone to decide upon a model just on battery specs.

Bruh, he's right there.

Google and other megacorps with AI slopbots: AI bots should be free to slurp up as much data as they want. It doesn't break copyright!

Also those companies: Wait, AI isn't allowed to steal from us!

Evolution and genetics were distorted to prop up racism, chattel slavery, and colonialist missionaries, yet we don't dismiss them as pseudoscience.

True, and in fact, bigotry was kind of a part of the origin story, not just a distortion. As it turns out, though, they're actually useful ways to describe contemporary biology. They started as a means for racism and bigotry, but they are not that any longer (excepting where bigots try to revive the racist elements every so often).

This is because the domination of nature and our ecology by humanity has its ultimate roots in the domination humanity by humans. Therefore, the solutions to our ecological problems are found by addressing our social and ecological problems simultaneously.

This is not a valid syllogism. The premises are not necessarily interrelated, but the authors are trying to appeal to our intuition by saying that we dominate the one and we dominate the other, therefore related. No, it does not follow that humans dominating each other is the root cause of dominating nature, and the final conclusion is therefore rendered invalid.

are you calling me the dimwit, the article's author, or the cultures from which the concept of wetiko comes from?

The article's authors. Apologies if you felt personally attacked.

If you have specific references for "the facts of reality [that] are sufficient" I'm all ears.

Happy to oblige! This is a good jumping off point, and as you'll notice, there's no need for "othering" in this system. As far as I understand it, it's actually still a work in progress (i.e. it's still a growing movement in Kurdistan), but it looks to be functional and scalable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_confederalism

But with regards to the article, the biggest issue I have is that it's founded upon the "othering" of people who disagree. "It's not our fault or something that we should fix together. It's their fault, and we should try to eradicate their disease." That's not to say that we have to "tolerate their intolerance," but they aren't diseased for having bad paradigms any more than someone is diseased for liking pineapple on pizza or believing in a different god. Ideas aren't diseases.

If we hope to have a socially and ecologically responsible society, it can't be founded upon othering, because that's the very division the authors are supposedly trying to reject.

What if we told you that humanity is being driven to the brink of extinction by an illness? That all the poverty, the climate devastation, the perpetual war, and consumption fetishism we see all around us have roots in a mass psychological infection?

If you told me that, I would tell you to fuck right off with this dehumanizing garbage. "Mind viruses" are analogies, and analogies are never perfect representations of what they're trying to convey.

Memes are to culture what genes are to biology: the base unit of evolution.

Oh, it's this fucking bullshit again. Therefore memes are a mechanism of cultural evolution? No, that's not how evolution or memes work; that's putting the cart before the horse. Ever wonder where the concept of the "woke mind virus" came from? It's this right here. The ideas in this article are the originating source.

So thanks a lot, you pseudoscientistific and pseudopsychological dimwits. Your hot garbage ideas helped prop up a bunch of fascists, whose bread and butter is lies and half-truths. I hope you're embarrassed every time you hear someone mention the phrase "mind virus," but I doubt you have the presence of mind to realize what you've done.

Gesturing at imaginary diseases is not how you enact an anarchist vision. The facts of reality are sufficient, and pseudoscience like this only hinders that effort.

They fell prey to one of the classic blunders. The first is this: Never get involved in a land war in Asia, and the second is: never chat with an AI when privacy is on the line!