dudeami0

I would say this is a little too pessimistic. Legislation in the EU and California have both forced tech companies hands, it’s why we can download all our data and delete all our data (supposedly, doubtful in reality) on the large tech platforms. The issue I see is getting legislation that attaches itself to a standard controlled by the W3C. You are right that it won’t be something done by the US federal government though.

Tragic, the line didn’t just go up because one investment was really good.

Disclaimer: I have no experience with Bazzite. A quick web search shows that it’s a distro based on Fedora Atomic. That being said, if you did everything according to the documentation, this is probably a bug that should be raised with the developers.

The first line states /init: error while loading shared libraries: libsystemd-core-256.11.1-fc41.so: c. This is basically the issue, for whatever reason the shared library for systemd (which if being used, is basically the backbone to your systems startup) isn’t available. The next place I would look is whatever tool/command you use to upgrade/build your system, this might of spit out an error related to why this library could not be built or why it’s inaccessible on the next boot. If the solution isn’t obvious from those logs, I would report this to the distro developers as a ticket in their bug tracker.

As to look at the positives, you have discovered the beauty of immutable/atomic distros. You can just go back to the working version instead of cussing at your PC.

Centralization is a weakness. These services can be targeted by governments that want to limit communication. Free speech is a commodity, and servers host this free speech. If a hostile organization, such as a government, targets a channel of free speech such as those hosted on a platform that makes it easy to setup a mastodon instance, this become an easy target that will affect a large portion of users. If you are serious about freedom, you have the freedom to self-host your own platforms.

Edit: I realize my post doesn’t answer the question proposed, but it’s more of an argument against such services. I would argue self-hosting doesn’t rely on paying third-parties to host your software, but I guess this is in the eye of the hoster.

Our studies show this lower literacy-higher receptivity link is strongest for using AI tools in areas people associate with human traits, like providing emotional support or counselling.

This is really dangerous, as subjective matters can easily steer people in vulnerable positions to think and act a certain way. Depending on the training data and safe guards put in place, this could easily lead to AIs telling users to do horrible things to themselves or others.

When I say residential IP addresses, I mostly mean proxies using residential IPs, which allow scrappers to mask themselves as organic traffic.

Edit: Your point stands on there are a lot of services without these protections in place, but a lot of services are protective against scrapping.

I don’t think either are good, but it’s funny how it’s bad when the other guy is doing it.

Foreign propaganda bad. Native propaganda good.

Edit: To add on this, isn’t this capitalism? These people are being paid to do a job, shouldn’t that be celebrated? /s

The only way I can think of is require users to authenticate themselves, but this isn’t much of a hurdle.

To get into the details of it, what do you define as an AI bot? Are you worried about scrappers grabbing the contents of you website? What is the activities of an “AI Bot”. Are you worried about AI bots registering and using your platform?

The real answer is not even cloudflare will fully defend you from this. If anything cloudflare is just making sure they get paid for access to your website by AI scappers. As someone who has worked around bot protections (albeit in a different context than web scrapping), it’s a game of cat and mouse. If you or some company you hire are not actively working against automated access, you lose as the other side is active.

Just think of your point that they are using residential IP addresses. How do they get these addresses? They provide addons/extensions for browsers that offer some service (generally free VPNs) in exchange for access to your PC and therefore your internet in the contract you agree to. The same can be used by any addon, and if the addon has permissions to read any website they can scrape those websites using legit users for whatever purposes they want. The recent exposure of the Honey scam highlights this, as it’s very easy to get users to install addons by selling users they might save a small amount of money (or make money for other programs). There will be users who are compromised by addons/extensions or even just viruses that will be able to extract the data you are trying to protect.

Ideally it wouldn’t be, but corporations will use whatever video platform is popular to pump out videos designed to increase engagement because to them it’s advertising. They will try and sponsor their content on whichever content creator is on said platform with a large audience.

This solves nothing if the goal is engagement. Any engagement in corporate properties is a form of engagement which promotes the media being presented. A corporate sponsored video is a corporate sponsored video, regardless of the platform.

I’d just skip OpenVPN altogether and get started with Wireguard or Headscale/Tailscale.

This one was huge for me. OpenVPN is pretty heavy with CPU overhead, where as wireguard is almost free. I was getting throttled due to the overhead of OpenVPN and roasting the CPU on my Netgear R6350 (it’s what I had lying around). With wireguard I get nearly the same speeds as without a VPN and my loads are very reasonable.

Also with weaker routers like mine, be wary of trying to use QoS, this will probably not help network congestion and instead become a bottleneck (like it did for me). This is where a beefy dedicated router really shines.

My question is, why give it for free? Has their product developed enough to win in the AI developer space? Are we reaching the point where you could self-host an AI code assistant as good as copilot? Or are projects such as johnny.ai (renamed, I’m not going to advertise it) challenging Microsoft’s market share in the AI developer space?

My only guess is Microsoft wants you to get used to their ecosystem and further ingrain developers into their development ecosystem. At best, once you are used to their ecosystem you’ll stick with them out of familiarity. At worst, they can use your input (prompts, refactors, etc) to further the development of copilot.

To me this smells of typical subsidizing of a product to capture market share then lock in that market share. Anything I’m missing?

Edit: johnny.ai seems to be a domain offered for resale by godaddy. I didn’t mean to link them but I’ll leave it here, don’t give godaddy money as they are a terrible domain name registrar.

To add to this spending some time in custody is inconvenient, but losing your rights being convicted of something you didn’t even do is more inconvenient. You think you know what to say until you say the wrong thing and start digging a hole.

This is good to know, but adds an additional step to simply requiring a passcode to unlock on screen lock.

Just the act of refusing makes the act of seizing your phone legal or not. If you legally give them your phone by your own will, they are able to use all evidence they find in the courts. If you deny to give them your phone, and they seize it anyways and access it you have a valid path to throw the evidence they discover out as an illegal search and seizure of your property. I’m not a lawyer but that is the general thought process on denying them access to your property.

Edit: Just want to say this mostly pretains to United States law and similar legal structures. This advice is not applicable everywhere and you should research your countries rights and legal protections.

I personally rather trust that my device isn’t able to be unlocked without my permission, rather than hope I am able to do some action to disable it in certain situations. The availability of such features is nice, but I would assume I would be incapable of performing such actions in the moment.

My other thought is, how guilty is one perceived if they immediately attempt to lock their phones in such a matter, by a jury of their peers? I rather go the deniability route of I didn’t want to share my passcode vs I locked my phone down cause the cops were grabbing me.

To add to this, don’t use bio-metrics to lock your devices. Cops will “accidentally” use these to unlock devices when they are forcibly seized.

Semi-cold? That’s extra, you’ll be lucky to afford it. The affordable water been sitting out on the pavement for a few weeks.