I gave them my documents with everything except the age blocked out with a black bar. I then digitally altered the birthdate to not be my real one. It worked.

Yes but the context of the post is overall difficulty. Of course if you’re an expert in something, related things to that specialty will be easy for you. But we’re talking about how hard something is for non-experts.

He’s talking about a debloated version of Windows. Of course it is simple to create installation media. But the comment I replied to insinuates that there’s some simple installation package to not include all the windows bloat, spyware, data collection etc.

The default Windows install is easy, like the image shows.

I have no idea what you’re talking about. I mean that in the sense that whatever you’ve used to install Windows, it must not be common knowledge or the default.

If you need special knowledge or access, I would call that “difficulty”. So even though, after you had all your special knowledge or access, it was easy, acquiring those preconditions was hard.

I.e. it was difficult to install Windows overall.

It’s absolutely not a skill worth having. If you ever run into issues and need the CLI, you can always get your knowledge right in that moment. If you already can do everything with your GUI and get the same results, getting the knowledge to do it some other way is just wasted time and duplicate work.

They simply don’t exist anymore. The only choice is to do this with a smart TV and never connect it to the internet.

I don’t know Dicio, but I mean can you just leave the app open? Because that’s essentially what the other assistants are, just devices with the app always open.

If you can leave the app open, and it otherwise complies with your requirements, then we already have a FOSS voice assistant, it just doesn’t have its own dedicated hardware yet. But if you would dedicate some hardware to it, like an old phone, then it could be largely equivalent.

Humane is a word designed to chastise people based on human societal morality. Humans evolved as a social cooperative species, and in a cooperative environment, selfish and exploitative entities are a drawback to others.

However, being selfish and exploitative of others is extremely useful for the entity behaving that way, as long as it is not ejected from that group.

The word humane is an expression of that ejection. Kindness, compassion and benevolence are good in a cooperative environment and benefit others and the whole group, thus we would like everyone around us to be “humane”. Labeling this behavior “humane”, good, and making the opposite, “inhumane” a very bad thing, serves to ensure these behaviors across a group of people based on societal pressure, thus making it more likely that people in general try to act humanely (or at least appear to).

Ultimately, every biological organism is entirely selfish, only “interested” (not in an actual conscious motivation kind of way, but in the total way they are built) in propagating its genetic material. Theoretically, in a cooperative context, the optimal way to achieve this is by taking resources from others all the time, giving nothing back, but having everyone else actually give. Obviously, that is not sustainable, since the giving entities will notice this behavior and thus stop their giving of resources. The result of that is a balance between selfish and altruistic behavior.

And thus follows, of course we all behave humanely and inhumanely. We are selfish and altruistic, some more this other more that. So yes, both behaviors are completely within human nature, the labeling of “humane” (i.e. someone who doesn’t act humanely is disgusting, not even a human) is an extension of this struggle of getting everyone to behave altruistically, while selfishness exploiting that altruism is not a bad strategy.

*talk directly to their content manager

I like to live dangerously and leave my /s’ at home.

Yeah no wonder that was only in a sci fi movie, that really just sounds too unrealistic.

I mean of course YouTube is popular. User-generated videos have always been popular (even pre-internet, like home videos on TV etc), but it’s never been the case that storage and bandwidth was cheap enough to not operate a website with videos at a loss.

The only ones being able to operate such a site are entities that have lots of spare cash. Otherwise, if the site gets too popular, it’ll have to shut down or become unusable because of having to limit access behind paywalls or similar, hugely stifling its popularity and likely killing it.

Google created a very good service with YouTube that no one else could compete with because no one had so much money to “burn”. They kept this up for years to a point where it didn’t really make sense for neither creators nor viewers to want to go anywhere else.

And now there is a lot of good content on YouTube. The content is good because creators can actually live off the YouTube payments, thus being able to spend a lot of time on the videos. It will thus stay popular, because creators will not start risking their livelihoods on any other platform.

While it’s fine to criticize Signal in that instance, I hope no one discards it because of that. Things don’t have to be perfect to be better alternatives, and Signal is so far along to be a good alternative that if you would personally, idk, insist on only using Matrix or whatever and refuse to use Signal, you’d probably be contraproductive for the whole privacy and openness thing.

It’s fine to prefer something else but I think it’s positive to be fine with using Signal too.

There is no public iMessage API that people can pay to use. Beeper (or rather the code it’s based on) reverse-engineered the iMessage protocol and server APIs and they simply make the same requests as the iMessage app on iOS would.

I mean theoretically it would be possible for people to use apps that are already cross platform, like Signal. People just care less than the inconvenience of installing an app on their phone.

I mean, it won’t be. It’s quite clear that while the Beeper company may have good intentions on paper, they also definitely want to make as much money as possible. They aren’t 100% bad, but also not 100% good either.

Considering they directly communicate with Apples servers and make money from that, I can’t believe that their company will last long legally. The only way to keep Android users being able to use this will be to make it open source and go “underground”. But I hope Apple will have a massive PR disaster on their hands while this happens.

Ethics will probably change… I guess in the future it’ll become pretty irrelevant to have “nude” pictures of oneself somewhere, because everyone knows it could just be AI generated. In the transition period it’ll be problematic though.

It’s perfectly possible to say “this is unacceptable, we never break userspace. Mauro, your change is obviously what is breaking userspace because …” without adding “SHUT THE FUCK UP” or “[all of this is] TOTAL CRAP”, i.e. being direct without being derogatory.

Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?

I mean, I interpreted the statement as “this is something that happened” i.e. he’s aware that it’s a belief from the past, where transporter technology didn’t exist yet. I can’t believe the Santa tradition actually survives into an age where materialism is mostly eradicated.

But yeah also, the Santa thing contains that Santa actually physically delivers the presents himself, which, even with their current technology, is impossible. You’d need time travel for that.