Interesting, here in germany I’d say that’s like a medium level swear (the sexual ones are what I’d consider high level, the religious ones usually no one cares about, at least in the north).
I wonder if the 3 usual categories - religious, sexual, fecal - can be approximately ranked (at least with one being the clear “worst” or “least bad”) in every culture or if sometimes it’s all over the place.
It’ll never stop being funny to me how in the US it’a apparently considered pretty bad and even gets censored while here in germany it’s one of those child friendly swears that you expect kindergarten kids to say.
Get your own domain and use it for mail routing to whichever email service of your choice. Afaik gmail offers this, and so does probably any other decent email provider. That way if a provider turns to shit, you just need to set up with a different one, but don’t have to change any accounts.
Downside: you will have to pay for that domain for the rest of your life (or change all accounts again)
I’ve been meaning to do this for a while, maybe I’ll finally do it now.
Ime with ublock it’s not nearly as easy to manage allowing only specific scripts to run on each website to make it work but with less garbage added on compared to noscript
Fully guilty of not even knowing there is one. I kinda just poked around installing DEs until I found one I liked.
It’s definitely the windows background for me though, gnome is just entirely different. Not saying it’s bad, but the people we’re trying to convince to switch usually have just as much of a windows (or sometimes mac) background, and often less willingness to learn.
I found gnome so unintuitive that i ended up switching to a different shell to uninstall it because I couldnt figure out how to close that app selection menu thing. (Though maybe I’m just bad at figuring out UX flows that are intuitive for most, seeing how I also despaired as my prof handed me his macbook for my thesis presentation and I didn’t manage to open the file, though tbf there I couldn’t even try to google it and was already nervous)
I’m sure it’s not hard once you know but any UX flow that isn’t already familiar can cause issues like that. Which is why KDE will feel much more friendly to the average windows user since it works the same way for the most part.
Many countries have restrictions on what you can and cannot post (hate speech being a common one). Turkey in particular has been moving towards autocracy over the last decade or so, so I wouldn’t be surprised (to be clear this is speculation feel free to correct me) if it had restrictions on lgbt issues or political dissent or something.
One of the major draws of discord is the fact that they host the servers for you, for free. Anyone can make an account, click a button, and have a discord server.
Afaik matrix does allow this (haven’t used it personally) but it’s something where I am a bit worried about hosting costs if it reaches a large scale. (Also unsure about how the matrix protocol works precisely, but if defederation is a thing which I feel like it has to be, I can see it leading to huge pains since discords use case is often about being part of a specific communitu, as opposed to twitter or reddit. Being unable to join a groip or see some messsges because of federation issues would be a major headache).
More and more I believe that Mozilla’s current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.
I think the salary alone is enough evidence of that. There’s a point, specifics of which will depend on your living situation, at which wanting a higher salary requires the same infinite greed that becoming a billionaire requires. And I’m very sure that this point is far below 1 million dollars a year. Mozilla’s CEO makes over 6 million.
If you feel like you deserve that, you are not fit to lead a nonprofit. You have already proven that you care more about giving yourself obscene wealth than about the benefit of others.
That’s not a matter of being dumb, just that they never had a reason to question the difference. The proper way to answer that if you think there might be confusion is to recommend arch and note that they might just care about the DE, in which case there are simpler options. Otherwise you’re just being an ass.
Another thing that I hadn’t really thought about before reading another comment in this thread is that the arch wiki install guide (and other pages) are written with the assumption that you want to understand what you’re doing. And I think for many people that’s just not the case. Which is fair enough, not everyone enjoys tinkering with software. Just like I’m currently paying someone to build my new pc for me because I really don’t enjoy doing that. But there have been a few places within the arch install process where I had to research some background info to know what to optimally do for my use case instead of taking a guess and hoping it works out. And that’s quite a barrier, I see people struggle with similar things all the time at work. If any research is required beyond what your step by step guide is telling them, many people will give up.
I think there’s a blurry line here where you can easily train an LLM to just regurgitate the source material by overfitting, and at what point is it “transformative enough”? I think there’s little doubt that current flagship models usually are transformative enough, but that doesn’t apply to everything using the same technology - even though this case will be used as precedence for all of that.
There’s also another issue in that while safeguards are generally in place, without them llms would be very capable of quoting entire pages at least of popular books. And jailbreaking llms isn’t exactly unheard of. They also at least used to really like just verbatim repeating news articles on obscure topics.
What I’m mainly getting at is that LLMs can be transformative, but they also can plagiarize. Much like any human could. The question is then, if training LLMs on copyrighted data is allowed, will the company be held accountable when their LLM does plagiarize, the same way a person would be? Or would the better decision be to prohibit training on copyrighted data because actually transforming it meaningfully can not be guaranteed, and copyright holders actually finding these violations is very hard?
Though idk the case details, if the argument was purely focused on using the material to produce the model, rather than including the ultimate step of outputting text to anyone who asks, it was probably doomed to fail from the start and the decision makes perfect sense. And that doesn’t seem too unlikely to have happened because realizing this would require the lawyer making the case to actually understand what training an LLM does.