Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)F
Posts
1
Comments
2398
Joined
12 mo. ago

  • The big danger here, which these steps mitigate but do not solve are:

    #1 Algorithmically curated content

    On the various social media, there are systems of automated content moderation that are in place that remove or suppress content. Ostensibly for protecting users from viewing illegal or disturbing content. In addition, there are systems for recommending content to a user by using metrics for the content, metrics for the users combined with machine learning algorithm and other controls which create a system of controls to both restrict and promote content based on criteria set by the owner. We commonly call this, abstractly, 'The Algorithm' Meta has theirs, X has theirs, TikTok has theirs. Originally these were used to recommend ads and products but now they've discovered that selling political opinions for cash is a far more lucrative business. This change from advertiser to for-hire propagandist

    The personal metrics that these systems use are made up of every bit of information that the company can extract out of you via your smartphone, linked identity, ad network data and other data brokers. The amount of data that is available on the average consumer is pretty comprehensive right down to knowing the user's rough/exact location in real-time.

    The Algorithm used by social media companies are a black box, so we don't know how they are designed. Nor do we know how they are being used at any given moment. There are things that they are required to do (like block illegal content) but there are very little, if any, restrictions on what they can block or promote otherwise nor are there any reporting requirements for changes to these systems or restrictions on selling the use of The Algorithm for any reason whatsoever.

    There have been many public examples of the owners of that box to restricting speech by de-prioritizing videos or restricting content containing specific terms in a way that imposes a specific viewpoint through manufactured consensus. We have no idea if this was done by accident (as claimed by the companies, when they operate too brazenly and are discovered), if it was done because the owner had a specific viewpoint or if the owner was paid to impose that viewpoint.

    This means that our entire online public discourse is controllable. That means of control is essentially unregulated and is increasingly being used and sold for, what cannot be called anything but, propaganda.

    #2 - There is no #2, the Algorithms are dangerous cyberweapons, their usage should be heavily regulated and incredible restrictions put on their use against people.

  • Since Flock CEO wants to give this movement some press

    Here's Benn Jordan, he's done a series of videos on the cameras, demonstrates their vulnerabilities, and talks about how Flock has been deploying secretly by co-opting local municipalities to subsidize their national rollout.

    First video, the one seems to have started the major anti-Flock push: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ

    Follow-up showing how easy they are to hack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY

    More live demonstrated vulnerabilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU1-uiUlHTo

    Not as directly related, but he discusses a way to use generative AI models to create noise masks for your specific plate that will disrupt the OCR process that ALPRs use. (Key term: Adversarial Noise) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_F4rEaRduk

  • It means 'Enemy of the rich' now

    e: important clarification, by rich I mean billionaires who own the majority of everything and not successful doctors, engineers or movie stars. Know your classes, kids

  • I did not, but I do spend some time making multi-paragraph long comments (see comment history) :<

  • Intrusive? You're not talking about AI itself. I have a 8GB model file and it is not intruding in anything. It's actually just sitting on the hard drive not doing anything intrusive at all.

    What you're talking about are things like Microsoft's CoPilot AI, or Apple's Siri integration or whatever other chatbot service that people pay for. Those service are intrusive, but they were intrusive before AI was invented.

  • I knew it was a lie

  • I mean, you did imply that I make people who disagree with me my personal enemies based on me commenting “Fuck gen-AI though”.

    I didn't say you were not a bot, I only allowed that you were possibly a regular human. Though it is sus that you're anti-AI and also being offended on the behalf of bots, hmmmm

    And why should LLM-bots post anti-AI messages?

    The same reason an LLM does anything, because a human prompted them to.

  • I sed what I sed

  • I sure did insult the anti-ai bots, you are right about that.

    That should not offend people that are not bots.

    You may have your opinions and be a human, but that is not true of everyone who posts on this topic.

    If you're reading 'bots' as 'people I think are dumb' or 'NPCs IRL' instead of 'automated posting done with the use of LLM augmented human agents coordinating in teams' then we're probably having two different conversations.

  • It has been long time since social media cared about showing us things that we wanted to see.

    There have been several shootings that have had massive social media impact, you may have avoided them (and you did the right thing) but a huge amount of people experienced witnessing their first shooting death and maybe 2nd, 3rd and 4th this year. That's a lot of cumulative psychological stress being inflicted on society and it isn't like we're living in a world that is otherwise a calming paradise...

    Social media is inflicting real harms and the people in control don't seem very motivated to try to control them. Or, they did try in tests and determined that Engagement was more profitable and they're shielded from the externalities so who cares really?

  • Yeah well, I don't like crunchy peanut butter but I don't make it my entire identity or treat anyone who disagrees as a mortal enemy.

  • You're right, as a consequence of the power of this new technology to change our life it poses a constant risk to fabric of society and our ability to understand facts about the world.

    Discourse and culture are shaped by the structure of these social networks. Those structures are designed to the benefit of a dozen or so specific people. The amount of power that it gives them over all of society is not an amount of power that should be wielded by a private individual.

    We wouldn't let Oppenheimer have an arsenal of nuclear weapons because he was part of the team that invented The Bomb. We recognized, as a species, that this technology was too dangerous for anybody to have (even though we all thought we were the exceptions) and we tightly control access to this technology and stack all kinds of safeguards and checks on their usage as if our lives depend on it... because they do.

    We can all see the power of controlling the perception and attention of society. We can see how discourse is shaken and manipulated for views and profit instead of for understanding and knowledge. We need to treat these technologies like they are dangerous cyber weapons. They need to be studied by professionals and the structure of these systems of discourse need to be set for the public good.

    Just to head off the obvious attack angle. I don't mean regulate speech, but the upvote system from Reddit is a terrible way to handle the 'which comments should we show people' problem. It's also probably not a good idea to use machine learning to optimize 'Engagement' or other metrics when we know the outcome is that it drives content that creates fear, hatred, disgust and anger. A video recommendation algorithm that prioritizes views and comment engagement over anything else ends of amplifying the viewpoints of the most extreme opinions and this creates a false perception of consensus towards extremism. Allowing programs to advertise themselves as 'News' when they're just 'entertainment shows' is about as harmful as letting companies claim their peanut butter is 'allergen free'.

    We're in the wild wild west with an incredibly destructive technology being driven by a couple of dozen people who appear to have little empathy and a taste for power that may lead them into flying too close to the sun.

  • It didn't, but EAC added Linux support a while ago... so any game dev can choose enable Linux support (and most do in my experience). I play many EAC games on Arch(, btw) with an NVIDIA card, HDMI 2.1, HDR works, etc. I have a working VR (Index) setup, a gaming mouse with better customization software (imo) than Windows, etc.

    Most of these things had various minor issues even a year ago and now the only thing I can think that is non-standard/requires tinkering is that I'm using beta drivers to have Vulkan support on NVIDIA. This provides a good HDR implementation. Once the Vulkan support is released in the official driver then a user could get all of the same features without ever needing to do anything but update their system and install Steam.

    Progress in the Linux gaming space advances every week. Things are approaching perfect, outside of structural issues (such as kernel anticheat). I have 213 games in my Steam library and the only game that I cannot play is Apex: Legends.

    Apex runs just fine, but EAC is configured to kick Linux clients if you try to connect to a match. This isn't a Linux issue that can be patched, this is a developer choosing to not allow Linux.

    If you haven't tried gaming on Linux in a while, you should give it a shot. I've long since ditched Windows in order to have more free space.

  • anti-ai bots don't understand humor, just hatred and outrage

  • You're welcome :)

  • The siren call of enshittification-driven short-term profits was too strong.

  • A leader doesn’t seem necessary. The leaderless nonviolent resistance movement has been winning in the court of public opinion.

    100%

    In some sense, they're using modern technology to mass produce propaganda but the people actually directing things are still stuck in the 1900s mindset when regards to thinking about power.

    Communication Technology has made these kinds of diffuse movements possible, that's why they're trying desperately to create an 'antifa' to fight against. They want a conflict with a target that they can slander/attack and instead they're just getting shit spontaneously from every possible angle.

    They're fighting a 20th century battle with 21st century technology. Like Russia using armor to invade a country armed with Javelins.

  • Steam? We had Wine launch scripts AND WE LOVED IT.

    If our DXVK and Mesa versions were not compatible we just kernel panicked like a real OS. Kids these days with their GE-Proton and NTSYNC don't know how good they have it.

    Kernel synchronization primitives? ABSOLUTELY NOT, we'll use file mutexes in userspace like Linus intended.

  • If they didn't want to be looked down upon then they wouldn't be using inferiour software.

  • Space Marine 2 works just fine on Linux, I was just playing it last weekend. It has a gold rating on Protondb.

    Kernel anticheat games can die in a fire, with all due respect to them.

    I'll worry about them when I get through my backlog of games which grows faster than my completed game list.

  • linuxmemes @lemmy.world

    But they were, all of them, deceived