Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

InternetPerson

@InternetPerson@lemmings.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

InternetPerson ,

How was it more performant?
As I remember it, Chrome was loading websites not noticeably faster than Firefox, as website loading speed depended and still depends mainly on your internet connection and hardware anyway.

As I remember it, Chrome exploded because it was pushed onto users at every possible opportunity while Firefox depended (and still depends) on users actively looking for it.

Used Google or Google products? Get ads for Chrome. Wanted to download Google Earth? You had to activly uncheck a box such that Chrome wasn't going to be installed as well.
Meanwhile no ads and not the same amount of exposure for Firefox.

That way they achieved a critical mass and snowballing did the rest. There were so many users using it that it was considered a good choice just because it was used by many people.

Regarding the performance aspect, if there even was a noticeable difference, it was worse than Firefox. Where else did the "Chrome eating RAM" memes come from?

InternetPerson ,

Restore Privacy – Alternatives to Google Products – The Big List (2024)

InternetPerson ,

I've been a loyal Firefox user for almost as long as Firefox has existed. So I'm probably a bit biased. However, when I used other browsers, and if it wes just to try them out, I didn't notice any benefits in terms of loading websites and executing their scripts. This includes Chrome. In benchmarks there are obviously differences visible, but to me as a user they didn't matter. I wasn't so short on time that I needed those microseconds. So I really don't get how performance could be an argument in this.

InternetPerson ,

I understand that you made such an experience, but I can't share it though. I've been a Firefox user for almost as long as Firefox exists, which is almost two decades. (I think I joined somewhere between 2005-2007). I've tried other browsers, sometimes I had to. However, I didn't notice any benefits compared to Firefox. Especially not in performance. Even though benchmarks have always shown clear differences, they weren't significant enough for me to consider switching, as the difference really didn't impact my browsing experience.

Regarding the memes: That was just a random annectode which I found suitable here. I don't claim it has been that way since the beginning. (Can't relate to that anyway.) But given that it has been around for a while, I don't see how performance can be an argument in favour of Chrome in this.

InternetPerson ,

I'd say give it a try and see for yourself.

I can just recommend using Firefox for a multitude of reasons. However, I am biased as I have been using firefox for almost two decades and did not have many reasons to complain.

InternetPerson ,

This becomes even more ridiculous if you consider that we wasted about 1.05 billion tonnes of food worldwide in 2022 alone. (UNEP Food Waste Index Report 2024 Key Messages)

But no. Supermarkets will miss out on profits if they ban people from their stores who can't pay.

Seems illogical? Because it is.

ChatGPT Answers Programming Questions Incorrectly 52% of the Time: Study (gizmodo.com)

The research from Purdue University, first spotted by news outlet Futurism, was presented earlier this month at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii and looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow that were then fed to ChatGPT....

InternetPerson ,

That's a good way to use it. Like every technological evolution it comes with risks and downsides. But if you are aware of that and know how to use it, it can be a useful tool.
And as always, it only gets better over time. One day we will probably rely more heavily on such AI tools, so it's a good idea to adapt quickly.

Gender bias in open source: Pull request acceptance of women versus men (www.researchgate.net)

Our results show that women's contributions tend to be accepted more often than men's [when their gender is hidden]. However, when a woman's gender is identifiable, they are rejected more often. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.

InternetPerson ,

Thanks for pointing it out. There is clearly room for a lot of error.

InternetPerson ,

globally important

This is continually decreasing.

It's even funnier that the website itself is still using "twitter" as URL.

Netflix Windows app is set to remove its downloads feature, while introducing ads (www.techradar.com)

Netflix has managed to annoy a good number of its users with an announcement about an upcoming update to its Windows 11 (and Windows 10) app: support for adverts and live events will be added, but the ability to download content is being taken away....

InternetPerson ,

Install an android emulator. Problem solved.

Start pirating again. Problem solved.

Make your own movies and shows. Problem solved.

Start a company, get rich, buy Netflix, problem solved.

Stop watching stuff, do something else. Problem solved.

Found a secret society, infiltrate politics worldwide, stir chaos and destruction, let the world burn and built a new Netflix from the world's ashes where you still can download stuff. Problem solved.

See? It's not that hard!

(In case it wasn't clear, I am joking.)

InternetPerson ,

Also, at least where I live, they are increasing prices.

Makes me feel like it's time to dust my old pirate hat...

InternetPerson ,

We, yesterday for a train ride. We, next week, for the way back. We almost every month for that purpose.

InternetPerson , (edited )

There is just that teeny tiny ethical problem of not paying the creators and distributors for something we enjoy. This becomes a practical problem as well. If they make less money, it's likely that even more movies or series get killed or never even started.

Idk what to do.

InternetPerson ,

I am absolutely with you on that one.

But I think it's tied to how we do business and less a problem which is very specific to the movie industry. Or in other words: it's our fucked up capitalism in action again.

The workhorses of such shows get almost neglected while the shiny poster people and producers get most of the share.

And that's basically everywhere the case. CEOs, managers, superiors are making insanely more money than those who are contributing a lot of work. It's an unfair system which is holding the movie industry tightly in its grip as well.

InternetPerson ,

Alcohol isn't that bad, obviously, if bad at all,

Depends on what you understand by "bad". Regarding health, it certainly is.

No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

InternetPerson ,

Which is cool

I disagree for health and a bunch of other reasons.

InternetPerson ,

There is lactose free cow water. Also, plant based milk doesn't have lactose.

InternetPerson ,

Please keep it civil. :)
The discussion was fine so far. What made you react so angry?

InternetPerson ,

In case you are sincerely wondering:

It has become common to show sarcasm or mockery through that random capitalisation of letters in text.

It was originally popularised by the mocking spongebob meme but its use can be traced back even earlier, according to Wikipedia.

InternetPerson ,

There's a loneliness epidemic and low alcohol consumption rates are a contributor to that

Are they? Sincere question, haven't read a report or something like that on that topic.

Regarding the remaining part, I understand how you see that. Seems logical. However, I would claim that this is more of a problem in societies mindset itself and less one tied to alcohol consumption. If people are raised in a way that they learn how alcohol is necessary, and don't learn other ways, if it's even incorporated in the particular culture of a society, then it's not surprising that those people have a hard time finding new friends.
There are plenty of counter examples, e.g., look at other cultures where alcohol is even forbidden or at least its consumption clearly discouraged. Even in western cultures there are plenty of people who found and prefer other ways. But sure, may of course not be the majority yet.

Regarding a loneliless epidemic, I guess there is also a lot more to it than alcohol consumption alone. For example I have picked up on smartphone usage / social media consumption as related on that. (Which is a very superficial statement now, I haven't read up on that.)

InternetPerson ,

Socially or ethically, I think I know what you mean.

I am being pedantic now and say that it can even be bad socially and ethically as a consequence of that or as a consequence of health concerns.

InternetPerson ,

Moderate drinking is not a problem.

From a health perspective, it certainly is.
No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health.

And it does assist with socializing

Which is a cultural thing. If people grow up seeing how alcohol is a social catalysator, they don't learn that it's perfectly possible to socialize without alcohol.

which seems like it would be beneficial for most people on here.

Idk, if that comes from a well-meant place, but it sounds kinda condescending.

The idea that people here are afraid of/resistant to drinking, yet will use cannabis and other materials seems very strange.

There are not just two kinds of people. From my experience those, who use cannabis or other drugs, are inclined towards alcohol use as well.

InternetPerson ,

You know, there are a lot of people who like to be told a story and immerse themselve into such lore and reallymenjoy such scenes.

Despite that, the cutscenes in games of the TLoZ series are really not that long, which you would probably know, if you would've played the games.

InternetPerson ,

When your keyboard is remapped, you commit those changes yourself.

InternetPerson ,

Because it's original work they contributed for free. Lending others that kind of expertise and time, just that it get's used by a machine learning algorithm, which aims to reproduce this, without giving it back to them or the community in a similar free manner, feels violating.
Apart from that, creators feel ownership over their content and it feels wrong not to be asked what happens to it. (Although those probably wouldn't – or shouldn't – use SO anyway, as their content gets commercialised anyway by giving it SO for free.)

InternetPerson ,

Not necessarily, no. There are a plethora of non-profit services and pages on the net.

What platform do you think you used to write that commeent?

Regarding platforms of for-profit companies, you are more right than wrong though.

InternetPerson ,

Stack Overflow, technically a neutral term. Idk though whether the name in such a context would violate any trademark laws even if it's a non-profit platform.

Snack Overflow

Nullpointer Exception

Access Violation

Instagram Advertises Nonconsensual AI Nude Apps (www.404media.co)

Instagram is profiting from several ads that invite people to create nonconsensual nude images with AI image generation apps, once again showing that some of the most harmful applications of AI tools are not hidden on the dark corners of the internet, but are actively promoted to users by social media companies unable or...

InternetPerson ,

To add to this:

Imagine someone would sneak into your home and steal your shoes, socks and underwear just to get off on that or give it to someone who does.

Wouldn't that feel wrong? Wouldn't you feel violated? It's the same with such AI porn tools. You serve to satisfy the sexual desires of someone else and you are given no choice. Whether you want it or not, you are becoming part of their act. Becoming an unwilling participant in such a way can feel similarly violating.

They are painting and using a picture of you, which is not as you would like to represent yourself. You don't have control over this and thus, feel violated.

This reminds me of that fetish, where one person is basically acting like a submissive pet and gets treated like one by their "master". They get aroused by doing that in public, one walking with the other on a leash like a dog on hands and knees.
People around them become passive participants of that spectactle. And those often feel violated. Becoming unwillingly, unasked a participant, either active or passive, in the sexual act of someone else and having no or not much control over it, feels wrong and violating for a lot of people.
In principle that even shares some similarities to rape.

There are countries where you can't just take pictures of someone without asking them beforehand. Also there are certain rules on how such a picture can be used. Those countries acknowledge and protect the individual's right to their image.

InternetPerson ,

I disagree. I think it should be illegal. (And stay that way in countries where it's already illegal.) For several reasons. For example, you should have control over what happens with your images. Also, it feels violating to become unwillingly and unasked part of the sexual act of someone else.

InternetPerson ,

Also why would you care if someone jerks off to a photo you uploaded, regardless of potential nude edits. They can also just imagine you naked.

Imagining and creating physical (even digial) material are different levels of how real and tangible it feels. Don't you think?

There is an active act of carefully editing those pictures involved. It's a misuse and against your intention when you posted such a picture of yourself. You are loosing control by that and become unwillingly part of the sexual act of someone else.

Sure, those, who feel violated by that, might also not like if people imagine things, but that's still a less "real" level.

For example:
Imagining to murder someone is one thing. Creating very explicit pictures about it and watching them regularly, or even printing them and hanging them on the walls of one's room, is another.
I don't want to equate murder fantasies with sexual ones. My point is to illustrate that it feels to me and obviously a lot of other people that there are significant differences between pure imagination and creating something tangible out of it.

InternetPerson ,

That's why we need strong legislation. Most countries wordlwide are missing crucial time frames for making such laws. At least some are catching up, like the EU did recently with their first AI act.

InternetPerson ,

The person has the knowledge that this is going on.

Not necessarily, no. It could be that they might just think they've misplaced their socks. If you've lived in an apartment building with shared laundry spaces, it's not so uncommon to loose some minor parts of clothing. But just because they don't get to know about it, it's not less wrong or should be less illegal.

In he situation with AI nudes, the actual person may never find out.

Also in connection with my remarks before:
A lot of our laws also apply even if no one is knowingly damaged (yet). (May of course depend on the legislation of wherever you live.)
Already intending to commit a crime can sometimes be reason enough to bring someone to court.
We can argue how much sense that makes of course, but at the current state, we, as a society, decided that doing certain things should be illegal, even if the damage has not manifested yet. And I see many good points to handle it that way with such AI porn tools as well.

InternetPerson ,

I always cook the whole package, which is usually about 500 g.

InternetPerson ,

Why only european ones?

https://lemmings.world/pictrs/image/1cc7a93e-d126-459c-b668-4aa2d6615aec.jpeg

Kanabo

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines
    •