I think they don’t take inspiration from Photoshop. Either it’s been a clone of a different product at some time or they developed it themselves. Hence the differences. I mean the whole UI doen’t really resemble similarity to Photoshop.

There are some blog posts on annas-blog.org from 2022, talking about IPFS.

The article doesn’t talk much at all about all the interesting technical details.

The press release talks about trouble with payment providers… So I suppose they accepted credit card payment.

Maybe the court documents are publicly available if anyone is willing to dig them up in order to find out… I don’t think I’m that interested. If it’s a good story, maybe someone will do a documentery or podcast episode at some point. Would probably do for a “true crime” show.

Didn’t Finland have an entire culture of doing spoofs on old German shit, like TV series? I’ve seen Die Kühe and I think it’s absolutely awesome. (The Dutch also did a good impression in Jiskefet.)

And I remember watching / listening to lots of M. A. Numminen. Not sure if that’s just the stuff that found its way back to Germany and me… But nonetheless…

The thing with the tv series might be a thing of the past, though. I’m not sure if anyone still remembers “Der Alte” or “Derrick”. It’s probably not that funny without the context. And how we watch TV has certainly changed during the last decades.

Give me like $7,500 and I provide enough harddisks for 183,200 episodes. I’m not sure what to calculate for traffic, though.

And I mean it’s a bit unfortunate that you have to commit money laundering and/or tax fraud alongside this “business model”. It’s just not that easy to say: Hey, I would like to pay taxes on this pile of money and I don’t want to say where I got it from, it’s definitely mine, though.

Plug it into a computer and see what the computer says.

I usually use Linux for that because it offers good error messages and I know the tools. But other operating systems might help, too.

And if you start writing to the card or executing recovery tools, make a backup / image first.

If the files are very important, maybe don’t tamper with it and ask for help. Like a repair shop, your local Linux community or any trustworthy computer expert friend.

The biggest enemy is probably encryption, if it’s encrypted. The files are definitely still there if you just ripped it out. In the old days you could just run a recovery program and get everything back.

Correct answer. And this is going to help way more than adding a few trackers. Also consider doing the port-forward in your router, if you’re behind a NAT and it doesn’t do it automatically. That makes even more peers available.

FYI: There’s also AnLinux, Linux Deploy, Termux, tainer, UserLAnd, …

Some of them aren’t maintained anymore. And they don’t necessarily have hardware-acceleration. But don’t all require root and system patches.

Sure. I buy tickets to their concerts, have bought CDs, movies, buy their game in the next Steam sale or on Humblebundle, rarely Patreon or support indie things on Ko-fi or whatever. I buy a novel if I enjoyed the first chapter(s) and want it on paper. Or go to the library. I just can’t afford all the music and Spotify isn’t paying the artists properly either. And I don’t want a DVD collection, so for TV series they don’t get money from me. Except for what the one streaming service I pay for forwards to them.

I’ve used laptops for more than a decade. And sure, in the early times thermal management wasn’t that elborate. But I really haven’t seen any laptop in many, many years that doesn’t do it with perfect accuracy. And usually it’s done in hardware so there isn’t really any way for it to fail. And I played games and compiled software for hours with all CPU cores at 100% and fans blasting. At least with my current laptop and the two Thinkpads before. The first one had really good fans and never went to the limit. The others hit it with an accuracy of like 2 or 3 degrees. No software necessary. I’m pretty sure with the technology of the last 10 years, throttling doesn’t ever fail unless you deliberately mess with it.

But now that I’m thinking of the fans… Maybe if the fan is clogged or has mechanically failed, there is a way… A decent Intel or AMD CPU will still throttle. But without a fan and airflow inside the laptop, other components might get too hot. But I’m thinking more of some capacitors or the harddisk which can’t defend itself. The iGPU should be part of the thermal budget of the rest of the processor. Maybe it’s handled differently because it doesn’t draw that much power and doesn’t really contribute to overheating it. I’m not sure.

Maybe it’s more a hardware failure, a defective sensor, dust, a loose heat conductor, thermal paste or the fan? I still can’t believe a laptop would enter that mode unless something was wrong with the hardware. But I might be wrong.

But reading that text like they tell you to do, is kind of an exercise in futility if you choose topic two. (the benefits of artificial satellites in telecommunications) I’d be angry at that point.

Why does it force the processor over the limit in the first place?

I think in every other laptop the CPU just throttles when it gets too hot. Meaning it can never exceed the maximum temperature. I wonder if this is a misunderstanding or if HP actually did away with all of that and designed a laptop that will cook itself.

And it’s not even a good design decision to shutdown the PC if someone runs a game… Aren’t computers meant to run them? Why not automatically lower the framerate by throttling? Why shut down instead?

Btw: Might be that you’re behind a NAT (router) and that’s why bittorrent doesn’t connect. You’d need to figure out which port your torrent client is configured to listen on and then do “port forwarding” of that port to your machine in the router you got from your ISP. Or use something like UPnP that does this automatically.

Not sure if that applies in your case and it’s unsolicited advice… But a fairly common issue with bittorrent.

Look at the USA, UK or countries like China. I think they’re all ahead if us. Leading in different fields. A skewed balance between capitalism and citizens rights, surveillance in general, and a dystopian surveillance state.

Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me. The Github issue also is very helpful. Seems that’s exactly my answer to “Why do I need a fourth store in addition to F-Droid, AuroraStore and Obtanium” 😉

Have a nice day, thanks for the STT keyboard! I didn’t really engage in the discussion because I’m exactly in the same situation as other people here. I already have the FUTO one and Sayboard… But eventually I’d like to replace FUTO software with free software alternatives. I don’t like their licensing. So this is very welcome.

Thanks.

Sure. There isn’t any paragraph on how it compares to other appstores or why the author started the project in the first place despite several other stores being available.

So I’m looking for the selling point. (Aside from your App being available there.)

Can someone enlighten me oabout the specifics of the accrescent.app appstore?

I guess it’s somewhat like Obtanium in that it fetches releases packed by the original developers, just plus an index, metadata and signing, thus more convenient and secure? I guess it’s open-source and everything? What are the unique benefits?

It’s lemmy.ml . During the API wars on Reddit lots of people came here and lots of new instances were founded. lemmy.world was part of that and quickly grew into -I think- the now largest instance by far. But lemmy.ml is at least 2 years older and hosted by the actual developers. And due to history hosts to this point some of the large communities.

Yeah. And “Lemmy self-corrects” is kind of what this post is about (in my opinion.) I’d like to see lemmy.world and a few other instances now do it and defederate. That’s how it should be, call out bullshit, be vocal and then do something about it. My point is, we’re at phase 1 or 2. Now we’re going to see if Lemmy self-corrects. As of now it didn’t.

I think just hoping for a bright future isn’t cutting it. And if you ask me, all the infighting and defederating each other also isn’t healthy.

Well that paper only says it’s theoretically not possible to completely eliminate hallucination. That doesn’t mean it can be migitated and reduced to the point of insignificance. I think fabricating things is part of creativity. I mean LLMs are supposed to come up with new text. But maybe they’re not really incentivised to differentiate between fact and fiction. I mean they have been trained on fictional content, too. I think the main problem is to control when to stick close to facts and when to be creative. Sure, I’d agree that we can’t make them infallible. But there’s probably quite some room for improvement. (And I don’t really agree with the premise of the paper that it’s caused solely from shortcomings in the training data. It’s an inherent problem in being creative and that the world also consists of fiction and opinions and so much more than factual statements… But the training data quality and bias also has a severe effect.)

That paper is interesting. Thanks!

But I really fail to grasp the diagonal argument. Can we really choose the ground truth function f arbitrarily? Doesn’t that just mean given arbitrary realities, there aren’t hallucination-free LLMs in all of them? But I don’t really care if there’s a world where 1+1=2 and simultaneously 1+1=3 and there can’t be an LLM telling the “truth” in that world… I think they need to narrow down “f”. To me a reality needs to fulfill certain requirements. Like being contradiction free etc. And they’d need to prove that Cantor applies to that subset of “f”.

And secondly: Why does the LLM need to decide between true and false? Can’t it not just say “I don’t know?” I think that’d immediately ruin their premise, too. Because they only look at LLMs who don’t ever refuse and have to decide on a truth.

I think this is more related to Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, which somehow isn’t mentioned in the paper. I’m not a proper scientist and didn’t really understand it, so I might be wrong with all of that. But it doesn’t feel correct to me. And I mean the paper hasn’t been cited or peer-reviewed (as of now). So it’s more like just their opinion, anyways. I say (if their maths is correct) they just proved that there can’t be an LLM that knows everything in any possible and impossible world. That doesn’t quite apply because LLMs that don’t know everything are useful, too. And we’re concerned with one specific reality here that has some limitations. Like physics, objectivity or consistency.