theneverfox

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

I no longer do this.

Not because it's not delicious (it is), but because it's a super cheap and easy way to eat 300-400 calories of straight carbs

I'd say don't knock it until you try it, but just put in a slight effort and snack healthier

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

I think this is a non-issue

Captchas aren't easy to bypass - run of the mill scammers can't afford a bunch of servers running cutting edge LLMs for this

Captchas were never a guarantee - one person could sit there solving captchas for a good chunk of a bot farm anyways

So where does that leave us? Sophisticated actors could afford manually doing captchas and may even just be using a call-center setup to do astroturfing. My bigger concern here is the higher speed LLMs can operate at, not bypassing the captcha

Your run of the mill programmer can't bypass them, it requires actual skill and a time investment to build a system to do this. Captchas could be defeated programically before and still can now - it still raises the difficulty to the point most who could bother would rather work on something more worthwhile

IMO, the fact this keeps getting boosted makes me think this is softening us up to accept less control over our own hardware

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago

I think this is a non-issue

Captchas aren't easy to bypass - run of the mill scammers can't afford a bunch of servers running cutting edge LLMs for this

Captchas were never a guarantee - one person could sit there solving captchas for a good chunk of a bot farm anyways

So where does that leave us? Sophisticated actors could afford manually doing captchas and may even just be using a call-center setup to do astroturfing. My bigger concern here is the higher speed LLMs can operate at, not bypassing the captcha

Your run of the mill programmer can't bypass them, it requires actual skill and a time investment to build a system to do this. Captchas could be defeated programically before and still can now - it still raises the difficulty to the point most who could bother would rather work on something more worthwhile

IMO, the fact this keeps getting boosted makes me think this is softening us up to accept less control over our own hardware

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Because I think the "rules" are based on what other people did

I select every little bit, which works, but there might be some wiggle room

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

This is such a simple idea that people seem incapable of understanding

Big companies can't innovate. They're pulled in too many directions and create bureaucracies that stifle the individuality needed to push beyond known techniques. At best, they can iterate and imitate - and even that is very hit or miss

There's this idea companies must grow or die - but in reality, companies grow until they can only perpetuate themselves. They start to only make sense on paper

Individuals drive progress - they need time and autonomy

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago

No, there's one use for Blockchain. An immutable public ledger with no trusted authority

That's useful for a lot of things - just not everything (and it has been shoved plenty of places it doesn't belong)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There's many reasons people pirate - sometimes it's a matter of means & availability, sometimes it's a matter of controlling their paid-for content (like people who actually buy switch games but want to run them on their steam deck), and sometimes it's basically a hobby

Some people would surely buy some games if piracy wasn't on the table (assuming the terms were unacceptable to them), but I used to rewatch the same things and play the same games endlessly. I think the vast majority would do without

And rejecting a service you don't consider worth it isn't moral. That's just basic capitalism and self-interest.

This seems to be our core difference. I don't think capitalism is a moral system, and "enlightened self interest" only works with equity of opportunity and fierce competition - that's not the world we live in. And even then, I don't think it's a very ethical moral framework

I see supporting a service hostile to users as immoral - it's like enabling an abuser, however slight, you're contributing to behaviors that are a detriment to others

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Because now they have your login and password - not a hashed version they can only validate against, but the real thing that can be used to log into your network. They shouldn't ever have it, aside from them being able to sell credentials this also means someone else could probably obtain access to all of them

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (3 children)

I'm not going to say pirating is some morally superior act, but there is something to be said for refusing to support companies that have user-hostile distribution

And I don't think that act is cheapened by accessing the content anyways - yes, you are not contributing to the creators while enjoying their content. If you weren't going to pay into the stream that they get a small part of anyways, then you're not costing them anything - if you wouldn't have bought it and didn't, it's the same result on their end either way

Ultimately it goes back to piracy being a problem of accessibility, and rejecting an inaccessible service is the moral part, I see the piracy in this context as just neutral

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Source?

Steam, case in point. You can find cracked games fairly easily, there's even games entirely lacking drm that could be passed around effortlessly

But steam is very convenient, the prices are reasonable, and they have good customer support. That's enough that even people who pirate switch games buy pc games on the same device

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We must establish a new order of monks, who all get up at 6am UTC. We can call them in sync

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Nah, because while it would be very easy to implement something like that, it would require specifically doing it. Programmers have 3 reasons for writing code

It's cool. It's necessary. I was told to do it in exchange for money

(And the secret fourth reason, it just kinda happened. I was building this related thing and I realized it'd be stupid easy to toss it in...I was in a fugue state and I have no idea what I wrote, but it's some of my best code ever)

Devs don't generally care about this kind of thing, and most of the time neither do the business folk. This kind of unnecessary crackdown only comes up when consultants like McKinney, who I've recently learned are the reason everything sucks

view more: ‹ prev next ›