Because when US politicians advocate for a single, global market, and a single, global internet, it is with the understanding that US firms and allied parties will dominate the space anyway. When that is no longer the case they get about as nervous as the Chinese got when they went and built the Great Firewall and made a clone of every popular western platform. Now that US/Western dominance is seriously challenged, we are seeing more and more signs of protectionism.
May give it a try one of these days. But knowing nothing of the reliability of the tool in detecting the malware decreases my motivation to even try I must say.
And would signatures of Pegasus exist in the backup?
Cool. I had no idea. Still…
MVT is a forensic research tool intended for technologists and investigators. Using it requires understanding the basics of forensic analysis and using command-line tools. MVT is not intended for end-user self-assessment. If you are concerned with the security of your device please seek expert assistance.
The real question here is why the researcher “librarian” didn’t even attempt to anonymize the dataset before making it available. Full anonymization isn’t a trivial task, but at least removing unique identifiers or replacing them with randomly generated ones would be good practice.
No no you see once in Lemmy you can engage in the communist left vs liberal center-left battles. It’s turtles all the way down.
Ooph. I guess we can get really dismayed at this, or maybe we should just think that given his infamy it’s only natural he’s able to monetize it, one way or another. So many influencers produce content that is on the face of it of very little value. Granted, not so many are making a career out of promoting the most toxic aspects of (so-called) masculinity. Even Jordan Peterson has redeeming qualities compared to this. Of course that’s a low bar. A low bar that seemingly many men are happy to pass and fork money for in the hopes of bettering themselves.
F
Knowledge and unconditional love should do the trick 🤞I have found that the men most prone to this are men with a chronic lack of love and self-esteem.
I am not sure that technology alone is to blame. But I have been thinking for a while now that recommendation algorithms should be open, scrutinized, and regulated even.
I think you’re spot on.
Omg 800,000 people (presumably mostly young men) signed up for that bullshit? Have we failed so many that they will seek help with the top douchebag himself?
Unfortunately unless you are a tiny niche community that isn’t ever targeted by spam or idiots (and how common is that really), moderators are a necessary evil. You probably don’t hate moderators. You probably hate bad/aggressive/biased/etc moderators. Or maybe sometimes you are the problem, I don’t know. It is not a problem with an easy solution. Usually large forums with no moderation become quickly unbearable to most people. And then moderators become in turn unbearable to some people.
Maybe a trusted AI can do a better job at this - like give it the community rules and ask it to enforce them objectively, transparently, and dispassionately, unless a certain number of participants complain, in which case it can reverse its decision and learn from that.
Do you use the integrated AI in new versions of Excel or do you ask ChatGPT or some other AI to write it out for you?
Granted, our tendency towards anthropomorphism is near ubiquitous. But it would be disingenuous to claim that it does not play out in very specific and very important ways in how we speak and think about LLMs, given that they are capable of producing very convincing imitations of human behavior. And as such also produce a very convincing impression of agency. As if they actually do decide things. Very much unlike dice.
The AI did not “decide” anything. It has no will. And no understanding of the consequences of any particular “decision”. But I guess “probabilistic model produces erroneous output” wouldn’t get as many views. The same point could still be made about not placing too much trust on the output of such models. Let’s stop supporting this weird anthropomorphizing of LLMs. In fact we should probably become much more discerning in using the term “AI”, because it alludes to a general intelligence akin to human intelligence with all the paraphernalia of humanity: consciousness, will, emotions, morality, sociality, duplicity, etc.
Ok makes sense. Thanks.
When it comes to cosmetics I thought it’s the other way around because men who will buy cosmetics are generally higher earners or something like that, so they’re generally willing to pay more.
Nice but paywalled for me
I didn’t even know that was a thing :(