I have been using Deezer because it was local for me, France. At the beginning you could upload your own collection to share with others, it was fun. Now it’s basically the same as the others, I think it pays artists a little bit more than Spotify. Also just learned that it is now majorly owned by some US investment fund. 🫠 At least it’s not directly funding terminators yet?

You receive: Windows 95 theme on Xubuntu.

Reverse Saruman, the money he donated made him look white.

The first step toward meaningful change begins with us. We must abandon our craving for glossy (and therefore glassy) devices, and instead embrace hardware that may not be as immediately pleasing to the eye (as it is the case with e.g. Fairphones or the PinePhone), but is built to be slightly more durable, somewhat repairable, and capable of outlasting even today’s limited commitments to software updates.

Fairphone and PinePhone being only mentioned anecdotally for being too pretty, and I guess not as sturdy as the author wants, is quite weird for an article about reducing fragility and improving repairability.

Looks like a cosmological cat traveling through nebulae.

My cute little fluffy parasite 🪱 😍

Also starting to spread on the cheapest plans of streaming services like Prime and Netflix.

I don’t think you can rely on volunteer labor and donations to keep things running indefinitely.

Doesn’t that imply that it will not work on the long term?
Or you think groups of volunteer will form up and maintain an instance for a while and then go down, and another group will pick up?
I’m afraid we may run out of people able to do that after they all get burned out like ee’s.

There’s actually a lot of human intervention in the mix. Data labelers for source data, also domain experts who will rectify answers after a first layer of training, some layers of prompts to improve common answers. Without those domain experts, the LLM would never have the nice looking answers we are getting. I think the human intervention is going to increase to counter the AI pollution in the data sources. But it may not be economically viable anymore eventually.

This is a nice deep dive of the different steps to make today’s LLMs: https://youtube.com/watch?v=7xTGNNLPyMI

I would eat well cooked insects even if mammal meat is not banned. Even more so if the environmental benefit is demonstrated. I bet you can do some falafel style paddies from insect flour and some spices, fried in olive oil and you probably don’t notice where it comes from anymore.

Full Metal Alchemist brotherhood, maybe.

And so does Lord of the Rings. It’s fantasy, having obviously good people and obviously bad people you kill without remorse is part of the genre.

That’s actually funny.

If there’s one thing Japan loves, it is economical competition. There are like 40 different ways to pay at a shop, it’s absurd.

Your way is assuming they will question the things with your push statements. What I’m saying is they believe they have solid foundation, and their alternative facts account for most pushes. They’ll bring up reasons. They’ll say “facts”(obviously not real ones, but they have them). They’ll feel they’re knowledge. Those things cause them to effectively counter soft pushes, in my opinion.

My work hypothesis is that most people are actually not that solid, they think they are until you push them to explain, and then they get softer as you raise points they didn’t consider before.

You said this:

Arguing without the understanding that they have alternatives facts is wrong

I’m asking you why would you think that is not already integrated in my way, since I think it is implied by what I explained.

Honestly, it makes me wonder if you’ve actually interacted with these sorts.

Not the MAGA people since I don’t live in the USA, but French conservatives, mostly through the diversity of background that exists in sports activities.

The best approach that I’ve found is to beat them to the punch of saying things. Basically, make points before they can say stipid shit, they’re very easily manipulated if they haven’t already taken a stance in the conversation

I think this could work, but it limits the number of opportunities quite a lot. I see no reason to not try both.

Why would you think it’s without knowing they got intoxicated by fake news?
That’s the point, you think they have wrong ideas, so you push them gently to increase the chance that they will question them by themselves.
If that’s a poor way to do it, maybe you have a better way, what is it?

Yes, the fuck.

Just gently question those: oh, why do you think this? What do you think of those people who have another opinion? Keep pulling on whatever they give.

Try seemingly open-minded questions about what they think. Gently introducing questioning will avoiding confrontation can work to shake their beliefs. It can be satisfying to see them become more nuanced as they try to explain.