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

atrielienz

@atrielienz@lemmy.world

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

atrielienz ,

The app doesn't contain malware when it's uploaded to the play store. It forced an update after it's installed that contains the malware.

atrielienz ,

I really wish more banks and credit unions would actually allow the use of 2FA tokens like yibikey or titankey etc. Too many places with real world effects to being hacked don't allow them and that's not really okay. Using my phone as a 2FA device is not what I want.

Best Buy Membership "discount" (lemmy.world)

So I was shopping with my wife today and I said "oh let's see if my membership helps out." So we went and added the same item to each of our carts, and to our surprise, the total was the same! So what is it exactly that I'm paying for in this membership if the items "original price" is higher for me than it is for regular...

atrielienz ,

That's illegal. They were trying to force you to abandon your job as retaliation. And even if they have no paperwork to the effect a good lawyer would be able to prove it was retaliation. But of course they don't pay enough for their employees to actually retain a lawyer. Shame, cause the payouts can be really good.

atrielienz ,

I'll still shop there if I can use trade in credit for old tech. But I literally only spend the store credit I get back from old tech. Its usually something that's several years old and worth like $40-50, and I spend it on something I was planning to buy anyway. I've tried reselling that kind of thing on eBay. It doesn't move because nobody wants a windows 7 computer or an old pair of earbuds from 7 years ago.

atrielienz ,

They were my go to for a long time for good charging cables and dongles. Don't know what happened with them. I do know they got delisted from online shops.

atrielienz ,

Which doesn't make sense on Lemmy because it's not algorithm based. But is probably a muscle memory reaction from using Reddit or similar.

atrielienz ,

That's fair. I didn't know all that.

atrielienz ,

The onion articles? Or just all the other random shit they've shoveled into their latest and greatest LLM?

atrielienz ,

This is perhaps the most ironic thing about the whole reddit data scraping thing and Spez selling out the user data of reddit to LLM'S. Like. We spent so much time posting nonsense. And then a bunch of people became mods to course correct subreddits where that nonsense could be potentially fatal. And then they got rid of those mods because they protested. And now it's bots on bots on bots posting nonsense. And they want their LLM'S trained on that nonsense because reasons.

atrielienz ,

I imagined him saying this to a Google home speaker. It was hilarious. I laughed.

atrielienz ,

Yeah. I was including Reddit shit posts in the "random shit they've shoveled into their latest and greatest LLM". It's nuts to me that they put basically no actual thought into the repercussions of using Reddit as a data set without anything to filter that data.

atrielienz ,

Even you think something must be wrong with them if they're agreeing to this. Just because you lean more toward an ailment that would make someone desperate rather than someone being deficient in congestive function doesn't mean you're any better. Like. I get it. It's hard to imagine a regular person just thinking one day it's a good idea to sign up to let a company run by Elon Musk implant anything into their body (especially their brain). But this is a bit of a high horse riding comment, isn't it?

atrielienz ,

This comment is not arguing in the spirit of the original comments or my own. Healthy people absolutely do want this technology for the sheer amount of convenience it could provide. Hence the number of science fiction stories about it. The thing is though, assuming that anyone who would sign up for a clinical trial must be sick is an interesting take especially in response to someone else positing that anyone who would do it is stupid or crazy. People can be perfectly healthy and still participate in clinical trials. For lots of reasons to include simply wanting to progress the science.

atrielienz , (edited )

I mean. That's also not what I was arguing although I did bring up that healthy people do want this technology too, so I can see how we got here. We aren't arguing the motive of the people signing up for or participating in this or any clinical trial. We are arguing whether or not we can judge others for assuming the motives of those signing up, and whether our judgements are any better.

atrielienz ,

  1. I don't know that the top comment assumed the people signing up for this trial were sick or medically unwell.

  2. I am not arguing the why or who of clinical trials. My comment had nothing to do with the why or who. It had to do with the judgements made by both comments about the who.

  3. I can understand why you'd feel that comment was insensitive if you have the context you provided. But an assumption about the motives without necessary context does not equal guilt on the original commenter. This person may not have considered the health of someone willing to join such a trial at all. It may never have occurred to them that unhealthy people were signing up.

  4. His hatred for Musk is kind of justifiable in the way Musk has accrued his wealth and the actions of his companies under his direction. And given that track record the logic of not wanting to become the next Hyperloop that is now just an underground tunnel.

  5. This is the internet. People gonna people.

atrielienz ,

See number 5. People really are going to people, but compounding that is also not any better.

atrielienz ,

People are naturally going to have the reactions they do to Elon Musk. If the news outlets didn't constantly put him in the spotlight more people would probably be willing to read the article and learn about the trial and the science. As it is I'm not surprised people didn't read the article.

I'm not particularly invested in either side of this which makes me a pretty unbiased third party simply pointing out that neither of you is making the community better with these kinds of comments. If you had quoted relevant parts from the article that would have been a better way to convey what you meant.

And mostly because you responded to me.

atrielienz ,

My comment had nothing to do with the article. So I didn't need to read the article.

atrielienz ,

Because you both made assumptions. Just because your assumptions were not about the article itself doesn't mean that you didn't make assumptions.

atrielienz ,

No. The assumption was that the other person had the context you had from the article, and chose to call someone stupid. But I don't know why you're even bothering with this. You obviously don't agree and that's fine.

atrielienz ,

Sure.

atrielienz ,

Buddy, just give it up. I don't care that much.

atrielienz ,

I don't even think hallucinations is the right word for this. It's got a source. It is giving you information from that source. The problem is it's treating the words at that source as completely factual despite the fact that they are not. Hallucinations from what I've read actually is more like when it queries it's data set, can't find an answer, and then generates nonsense in order to provide an answer it doesn't have. Don't think that's the same thing.

atrielienz ,

I understand the gist but I don't mean that it's actively like looking up facts. I mean that it is using bad information to give a result (as in the information it was trained on says 1+1 =5 and so it is giving that result because that's what the training data had as a result. The hallucinations as they are called by the people studying them aren't that. They are when the training data doesn't have an answer for 1+1 so then the LLM can't do math to say that the next likely word is 2. So it doesn't have a result at all but it is programmed to give a result so it gives nonsense.

Google Search’s “udm=14” trick lets you kill AI search for good | Ars Technica (arstechnica.com)

Tack "&udm=14" on to the end of a normal search, and you'll be booted into the clean 10 blue links interface. While Google might not let you set this as a default, if you have a way to automatically edit the Google search URL, you can create your own defaults.

atrielienz , (edited )

I'm not a programmer. Can I add this to the url string I already have as my default custome search?

Example:

https://www.google.com/search?q=%s&udm=14&q=%s

Or is this the same thing as yours:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%s&udm=14

atrielienz ,

I think I may try both and see what happens just because I'd like to know. Thanks for the response though.

atrielienz ,

Duckduckgo suffers a lot of the same problems as google and other search engines. It's just not getting progressively worse as fast as google. It's still been getting worse and worse as time has gone on. I really dislike people who just point to another search engine like it's the end all be all and don't or won't acknowledge that each one has problems and a lot of the problems overlap significantly. None of that fixes the problem or makes any of these companies backtrack on their terrible implementation of anti-user/anti-consumer policies.

atrielienz , (edited )

Things like irrelevant results, inaccurate or outdated information, missing or completely incorrect information, or just information that doesn't contextualize the queries properly. For a start. Do you think search engine optimisation is just a google thing or what? Because I have news for you. Seo is a problem for all of the search engines. So are irrelevant results, failure to contextualize queries, and just receiving incorrect or missing information. None of those problems get fixed by switching to duck duck go, or bing or kagi or whatever. Can I avoid the AI LLM BS? Maybe. But having tried alternatives I just don't find them to be particularly better. In some cases, especially for my work I find them to be worse.

Stop saying "alternatives are available". If I search for an AP article using search terms "apnews.com: senator visits Taiwan" I should get news articles from the AP news website. Even if those are from 2014. That's contextually accurate to the search query. I get articles from a fair number of websites and news outlets. I don't want those. Know what I don't get? Articles in chronological order from when they were written, from the AP news website. I don't want anything from twitter or Facebook or Reddit. That's me trying to use a search engine to search a specific website. Same thing happens when I search for a gif on imgur.com using imgur.com: "search query" in the search box.

Years ago I tried to use google and duck duck go and Bing to find information about some nonsense someone at work was spouting about congress attempting to pass a pro child molester bill. Not only could I not find anything relating to where this was being reported and what nonsense they were bastardizing to come to such a ridiculous conclusion, I couldn't even find actual bills relating to things like anti-child molestation legislation. I had to actually search the congress website and then use key words on the website to find what I was looking for.

Try looking for a sort of popular anime from the early 90's that you can't remember the name of. You get a bunch of top ten lists. You get anime that came out well after the time period specified. You get random fanart. You will absolutely not get the anime you're looking for unless it was really really popular. The alternatives all give varying degrees of the same results.

atrielienz ,

It doesn't. But it makes the results more bearable and less filled with trash.

atrielienz ,

It's illegal to charge for water in the US.

atrielienz ,

Gotta love unregulated capitalism.

atrielienz ,

Username checks out.

atrielienz ,

Angelo ran da into the ground long before this. Not gonna lie, I'm not surprised. Not even disappointed.

atrielienz ,

I do not care.

atrielienz ,

I have a question for you. What is the difference between Google being banned in China and Tik Tok being banned in the US?

atrielienz ,

Only just now? Really?

atrielienz ,

Didn't the model 3 have one that was a miniature car? You'd think they would allow that as an option for the cyber truck.

atrielienz ,

GM made an electric car in 1996 (the EV1). It even has a random cult following to this day. Tesla's original founders sort of re-jumpstarted the electric car with new branding but we've been making electric cars for a long time. Range, cost, and infrastructure is what held us back not competition. Now we have the infrastructure (which I will say is what Tesla has largely given us, and what should be the way forward for their business model). The Nissan Leaf was the best selling electric vehicle of all time when Tesla launched the roadster (that same year). The problem really is that most car companies are bad at marketing electric cars to this day. In 2012 Ford launched an all electric Ford Focus. Just about nobody knew about it.

He did not start the entire thing and I'm sick of hearing people say that. He took a company from other people and ran it into the ground both by hemorrhaging money and with poorer and poorer build quality and I am quite literally sick of his face.

atrielienz ,

https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/3/24147936/nintendo-dmca-takedown-yuzu-emulator-copies

It's true. They used Nintendo's own cryptographic keys to make the yuzu switch emulation work.

atrielienz ,

And Nintendo won.

atrielienz ,

Here's the thing. The creators of Yuzu folded which is a win as far as Nintendo is concerned and a loss for everyone else who uses the yuzu emulators. Your semantics about the situation aren't helping. All I did was supply a link to a news story that was already available on Lemmy on literally the technology community. This has already been hashed out.

atrielienz , (edited )

And if Nintendo has its way (which they did this go round) they won't have to. They got what they wanted and they're not having to spend ridiculous amounts of money (that there's basically no way to re-coup) on litigation. They sued a guy who can never pay them back what the court says he owes them. I doubt they want to go through that again. Easier to just for arbitrate the proceedings.

atrielienz , (edited )

This assumes that they aren't hiring the CEO to be the fall guy. Someone who's job is largely (as things stand now) meant to take on the risk that if the company does not increase profits or make shareholders happy, they will blame and fire that person and hire someone else.

Since a lot of CEOs kind of bet on this they take ridiculous chances (like getting paid in stock options that only mature at a certain point with the knowledge that they need to make stock options valuable so they can cash out).

Valuable doesn't have to be long term. It just has to last long enough for the person in question to cash out.

atrielienz ,

Can linkedin go under. Can musk buy LinkedIn?

atrielienz ,

Mine's turned off. But thanks for saving me the read.

atrielienz ,

92, Can we not do this?

atrielienz ,

I recommend some clips. The kind used to hang laundry. I believe that trashcan comes with a swiveling lid not pictured here and if the bag is installed properly the lid will hold it in place. But if you don't have the lid (they're not made of a particularly durable material or to a durable design spec), the clips do work.

atrielienz ,

My asvab score was a 92. Had a migraine that morning. Can we not do this? This is just silly.

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