Eh, that’s a bit of a stretch. There’s more awareness by default here because of GDPR and such, but I wouldn’t say people really care that much more here

Congrats, you completely missed the point. Maybe read the actual article, before going on a rant that’s only tangentially related?

It is an algorithm that searches a dataset and when it can’t find something it’ll provide convincing-looking gibberish instead.

This is very misleading. An LLM doesn’t have access to its training dataset in order to “search” it. Producing convincing looking gibberish is what it always does, that’s its only mode of operation. The key is that the gibberish that comes out of today’s models is so convincing that it actually becomes broadly useful.

That also means that no, not everything an LLM produces has to have been in its training dataset, they can absolutely output things that have never been said before. There’s even research showing that LLMs are capable of creating actual internal models of real world concepts, which suggests a deeper kind of understanding than what the “stochastic parrot” moniker wants you to believe.

LLMs do not make decisions.

What do you mean by “decisions”? LLMs constantly make decisions about which token comes next, that’s all they do really. And in doing so, on a higher, emergent level they can make any kind of decision that you ask them to, the only question is how good those decisions are going be, which in turn entirely depends on the training data, how good the model is, and how good your prompt is.

Between 40-60% of people have some form of permanent brain damage and 70-80% have long covid problems

Wait what? I’m with you on masking etc., but those numbers seem a bit high, where did you get those from?

Don’t know if this is the case here, but the word pedophile refers to someone who is sexually attracted to children, and rapists don’t necessarily have to be attracted to their victims. There can be other motivations at play. So yeah, it’s possible that someone raping a child is not actually a pedophile. Doesn’t make it any less disgusting of course, and I have no clue why anyone thought “but he’s not a pedo” would be a reasonable argument here

Right, that’s definitely an important thing, that at least with gog, you can defend yourself against that possibility.

My “best we got” was in regards to the potential to become a lot worse because of shareholder pressure. Given that CD Project is a publicly traded company, GOG is much worse in that regard than Steam.

I fully agree that GOG, as it currently is, could be the better product for you depending on your values, but its defenses against enshittification are objectively much worse than Steam’s*, and that’s all I was talking about.

*That is, until Gabe dies, I guess, who knows what’ll happen then

Nobody is talking about “no potential”. Just “a lot less potential than any other option out there”, and that’s currently the best we got

It depends on where you live. In Germany, forced arbitration in general TOS is invalid and has to be separately negotiated and agreed to. In general, what you can put into your TOS is pretty restricted, anything you put in there that a consumer wouldn’t reasonably expect is not gonna be legally binding.

https://law.stackexchange.com/a/82748

You’re not wrong, but the way you put it makes it sound a little bit too intentional, I think. It’s not like the camera sees infrared light and makes a deliberate choice to display it as purple. The camera sensor has red, green and blue pixels, and it just so happens that these pixels are receptive to a wider range of the light spectrum than the human eye equivalent, including some infrared. Infrared light apparently triggers the pixels in roughly the same way that purple light does, and the sensor can’t distinguish between infrared light and light that actually appears purple to humans, so that’s why it shows up like that. It’s just an accidental byproduct of how camera sensors work, and the budgetary decision to not include an infrared filter in the lens to prevent it from happening.

The German saying says “Hut”, which is a less broad term than the English “hat”. And it definitely does not include that.

Will if we’re only talking charging, USB-C should be as easy to implement as any of them, basic 5v is gonna work even without most of the pins connected

In that case it becomes a violation again. At least according to the law

Pretty sure most people here are talking about the usage side of things. If we were to go by effort to implement the connector, let’s just go back to serial ports

I mean, this is one of the few cases where you actually can reasonably say that you might not have to give a damn about GDPR. Assuming this is in the US, there’s a high chance that no EU citizen lives in that building, and thus GDPR doesn’t apply.

(Yes, I know this didn’t actually happen)

One plugs into line voltage

Well, but that’s not what’s coming out of the end that you plug into the razor. The wall plug for it contains a transformer that steps it down to 15V. Would still be a bad idea, but it’s not line voltage.

B is fine, just a bit big. Agree on micro though.

How is USB-C worse than either of them

Not that I disagree with you generally, but in the recent case, manual door release wouldn’t have helped, as it’s basically impossible to push open a car door against the water pressure outside a submerged car.

So, basically cloud saves with extra steps, except you only get a single save and can’t replay the game? Sounds even worse than current solutions, honestly