Skip to content

YouTube might slow down your videos if you block ads

Technology
226 151 208
  • 26 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    F
    Absolute horseshit. Bulbs don't have microphones. If they did, any junior security hacker could sniff out the traffic and post about it for cred. The article quickly pivots to TP-Link and other devices exposing certificates. That has nothing to do with surveillance and everything to do with incompetent programming. Then it swings over to Matter and makes a bunch of incorrect assertion I don't even care to correct. Also, all the links are to articles on the same site, every single one of which is easily refutable crap. Yes, there are privacy tradeoffs with connected devices, but this article is nothing but hot clickbait garbage.
  • 206 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    F
    Imagine if the US gets saved by the fucking Mexican cartels that'd be crazy. Please let it happen
  • 816 Stimmen
    199 Beiträge
    506 Aufrufe
    Z
    It's clear you don't really understand the wider context and how historically hard these tasks have been. I've been doing this for a decade and the fact that these foundational models can be pretrained on unrelated things then jump that generalization gap so easily (within reason) is amazing. You just see the end result of corporate uses in the news, but this technology is used in every aspect of science and life in general (source: I do this for many important applications).
  • 371 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    79 Aufrufe
    hollownaught@lemmy.worldH
    Bit misleading. Tumour-associated antigens can very easily be detected very early. Problem is, these are only associated with cancer, and provide a very high rate of false positives They're better used as a stepping stone for further testing, or just seeing how advanced a cancer is That is to say, I'm assuming that's what this is about, as i didnt rwad the article. It's the first thing I thought of when I heard "cancer in bloodstream", as the other options tend to be a bit more bleak Edit: they're talking about cancer "shedding genetic material", which I hate how general they're being. Probably talking about proto oncogenes from dead tumour debris, but seems different to what I was expecting
  • Let the A.I work or not?

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 100 Stimmen
    60 Beiträge
    146 Aufrufe
    jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.worldJ
    We all get emotional on certain topics; it is understandable. All is well, peace.
  • 406 Stimmen
    83 Beiträge
    167 Aufrufe
    J
    Of course they don't click anything. Google search has just become a front-end for Gemini, the answer is "served" up right at the top and most people will just take that for Gospel.
  • 0 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    kolanaki@pawb.socialK
    I kinda don't want anyone other than a doctor determining it, tbh. Fuck the human bean counters just as much as the AI ones. Hopefully we can just start growing organs instead of having to even make such a grim decision and everyone can get new livers. Even if they don't need them.