Hacksaw

Yeah, you're guilty. A HEAVIER vehicle pollutes the city more, a LARGE vehicle creates a bigger hazard for smaller vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians than someone in a smaller car, and a WIDE vehicle creates a hazard when you park in an already narrow road.

Like, I get that you're trolling, but if you seriously don't understand why large vehicles harm the inhabitants of cities, especially old, dense cities, then I can't help you.

NUC for 100$ https://www.amazon.com/Bmax-B1-Pro-Fanless-Computer/dp/B0CJBST7XQ), if you wait for a sale you can often get an even better one. Kodi does basically everything you were asking for with a couple of plugins for free. Your phone works as a remote with a free app (kodi remote). You can "program it" by taking any keyboard in the house and setting it up, shouldn't need it after.

If you somehow don't have a keyboard or mouse and/or don't have the tech literacy skills to install a program and a couple plugins and have no desire to learn then I can understand why you feel like Chrome cast is your only option, because it probably is. Nothing wrong with that I suppose, but stop acting like it's the best option for the average person, let alone the average person on Lemmy.

You can get an N100 NUC for about 100$ and it's a full windows 11 or Linux PC that can do everything you listed and everything else a computer can do. No ads unless you allow them.

Housing can't be an investment (i.e. exponential growth above inflation) AND an affordable place for people to live for future generations. This mentality is absolutely brain-dead.

Most crypto transactions are trivially identifiable these days. Most blockchain are an unencrypted public leger and most crypto retailers like coinbase require government ID.

I understand your point, but disagree.

We tend to think of these models as agents or persons with a right to information. They "learn like we do" after all. I think the right way to see them is emulating machines.

A company buys an empty emulating machine and then puts in the type of information is would like to emulate or copy. Copyright prevents companies from doing this in the classic sense of direct emulation already.

LLM companies are trying to push the view that their emulating machines are different enough from previous methods of copying that they should be immune to copyright. They tend to also claim that their emulating machines are in some way learning rather than emulating, but this is tenuous at best and has not yet been proven in a meaningful sense.

I think you'll see that if you only feed an LLM art or text from only one artist you will find that most of the output of the LLM is clearly copyright infringement if you tried to use it commercially. I personally don't buy the argument that just because you're mixing several artists or writers that it's suddenly not infringement.

As far as science and progress, I don't think that's hampered by the view that these companies are clearly infringing on copyright. Copyright already has several relevant exemptions for educational and private use.

As far as "it's on the internet, it's fair game". I don't agree. In Western countries your works are still protected by copyright. Most of us do give away those rights when we post on most platforms, but only to one entity, not anyone/ any company who can read or has internet access.

I personally think IP laws as they are hold us back significantly. Using copyright against LLMs is one of the first modern cases where I think it will protect society rather than hold us back. We can't just give up all our works and all our ideas to a handful of companies to copy for profit just because they can read and view them and feed them en masse into their expensive emulating machines.

We need to keep the right to profit from our personal expression. LLMs and other AI as they currently exist are a direct threat to our right to benefit from our personal expression.

It's not a PERSON. The only person involved is literally copying the internet and duct taping it together to form chat gpt. Then they say "the AI is reading and learning like any human would". No brother, the AI IS MADE FROM a copy of all the stolen words. Before the theft, there is no AI that you can put the words into and have it learn. It's just a matrix filled with trillions of zeroes. It's only an AI AFTER you build it from the stolen data.

I don't know how you make that list. It's wild. LOTR and Maritx 1 I'm on board solid story, solid movie, solid acting, visuals, sound design, no notes.

I don't know how you take matrix 2 without 3, it's just the first and second part of the same, somewhat unsatisfying conclusion to the matrix, still pretty good and they tried something that blockbuster movies rarely tried: to make you question the nature of reality.

Inception is a self masturbatory movie about the importance of movies. It's not bad, but I don't know how it joins the others.

Interstellar is not a great movie. The visuals are nice, but the plotline completely falls apart imo. It's like they knew where they wanted to go, realised half way through there was no way to get there, then just used enough jargon and pseudoscience to hide the fact they drew a straight line from where they were to the conclusion. They even had to retcon stuff with janky time travel.

I'm not mad because i disagree with your list, I just don't see what puts it together. It's like someone saying his favorite foods are steak, sushi but no fish, apples, and fruitty toothpaste.

Small and medium (and even large) companies investing in talent instead of commercial solutions is the solution to improving FOSS. I know it has downsides, as you stated, but there are significant upsides. FOSS is cheaper than a custom solution, and the company only has to pay for the modifications it wants to see. The whole community then benefits from their hard work adding features and maintaining the software.

I'm not saying that it's the BEST idea for every company. All I'm saying is not to discount FOSS out of hand for these companies. There are significant advantages for companies that should be weighed against the cons. This kind of advocacy is also important in furthering the FOSS model.

LMAO Yes! Exactly in the same way that walking backwards towards a cliff counts as backing up. Technically it is a backup, but in practice a disaster is imminent lol.

That's a common belief, but it's not correct. It isn't MEANT as anything. It's purely incidental. A jury not guilty finding is irreversible. And jurors have certain criminal and civil immunity in their roles as jurors. Both of those facts are important for the functioning of our legal system, but they create a loophole. This loophole was named "Jury nullification" and was mostly used for terrible things like letting racists off.

I'm not saying it's not possible to use it for good, but it's certainly not some intended function of the justice system that's being kept quiet by the powers that be.

I wouldn't say it's a bad thing. I don't think it's more or less selfish than other climate aware choices like driving a reasonably efficient car into the ground, driving less overall, producing less waste, etc....

Everything you spend money on is what you personally want to see more of in society (because at the very least you want to have it yourself). I don't think it's virtuous to buy into immature technologies per se. I'm just happy there are people right now who are doing it for EVs as early adopters because it means more investment into electric transportation technology.

One day you may buy an electric car, or use electric transportation as your main mode of transport because it will be a mature technology that meets your needs. If you do, it'll be in part thanks to early adopters paying a relative premium at time.