Skip to content

time to switch to DeltaChat 😁

Technology
12 3 121
  • 283 Stimmen
    55 BeitrÀge
    208 Aufrufe
    S
    I really don't understand the "LLM as therapy" angle. There's no way people using these services understand what is happening underneath. So wouldn't this just be textbook fraud then? Surely they're making claims that they're not able to deliver. I have no problem with LLM technology and occasionally find it useful, I have a problem with grifters.
  • 44 Stimmen
    3 BeitrÀge
    52 Aufrufe
    I
    Next up: Dos Exploit found in all electric devices in the world! A hacker with physical access can cut the wires.
  • 181 Stimmen
    16 BeitrÀge
    172 Aufrufe
    P
    I really want to know the name of the contractor who made that proposal.
  • In Militarizing Push, Russian School Children To Build Drones

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    263 Stimmen
    37 BeitrÀge
    528 Aufrufe
    Z
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
  • Pornhub is Back in France.

    Technology technology
    33
    1
    311 Stimmen
    33 BeitrÀge
    301 Aufrufe
    D
    Nordé VPN
  • 294 Stimmen
    72 BeitrÀge
    1k Aufrufe
    kittyjynx@lemmy.worldK
    Just drink some Popov grade Trump Vodka at one of his many totally not bankrupt casinos to take your mind off of it.
  • 461 Stimmen
    94 BeitrÀge
    2k Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • 92 Stimmen
    42 BeitrÀge
    393 Aufrufe
    G
    You don’t understand. The tracking and spying is the entire point of the maneuver. The ‘children are accessing porn’ thing is just a Trojan horse to justify the spying. I understand what are you saying, I simply don't consider to check if a law is applied as a Trojan horse in itself. I would agree if the EU had said to these sites "give us all the the access log, a list of your subscriber, every data you gather and a list of every IP it ever connected to your site", and even this way does not imply that with only the IP you could know who the user is without even asking the telecom company for help. So, is it a Trojan horse ? Maybe, it heavily depend on how the EU want to do it. If they just ask "show me how you try to avoid that a minor access your material", which normally is the fist step, I don't see how it could be a Trojan horse. It could become, I agree on that. As you pointed out, it’s already illegal for them to access it, and parents are legally required to prevent their children from accessing it. No, parents are not legally required to prevent it. The seller (or provider) is legally required. It is a subtle but important difference. But you don’t lock down the entire population, or institute pre-crime surveillance policies, just because some parents are not going to follow the law. True. You simply impose laws that make mandatories for the provider to check if he can sell/serve something to someone. I mean asking that the cashier of mall check if I am an adult when I buy a bottle of wine is no different than asking to Pornhub to check if the viewer is an adult. I agree that in one case is really simple and in the other is really hard (and it is becoming harder by the day). You then charge the guilty parents after the offense. Ok, it would work, but then how do you caught the offendind parents if not checking what everyone do ? Is it not simpler to try to prevent it instead ?