Skip to content

WhatsApp is dropping its native Windows app in favor of an uglier web version

Technology
1 1 0
  • Elon Musk Floats a New Source of Funding for xAI: Tesla

    Technology technology
    11
    93 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    90 Aufrufe
    S
    What do I call it, kif? Ugh..... Sex-lexia
  • AMD to resume MI308 AI chip exports to China

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    22 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Firefox 140 Brings Tab Unload, Custom Search & New ESR

    Technology technology
    41
    1
    234 Stimmen
    41 Beiträge
    224 Aufrufe
    S
    Read again. I quoted something along the lines of "just as much a development decision as a marketing one" and I said, it wasn't a development decision, so what's left? Firefox released just as frequently before, just that they didn’t increase the major version that often. This does not appear to be true. Why don't you take a look at the version history instead of some marketing blog post? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/releases/ Version 2 had 20 releases within 730 days, averaging one release every 36.5 days. Version 3 had 19 releases within 622 days, averaging 32.7 days per release. But these releases were unscheduled, so they were released when they were done. Now they are on a fixed 90-day schedule, no matter if anything worthwhile was complete or not, plus hotfix releases whenever they are necessary. That's not faster, but instead scheduled, and also they are incrementing the major version even if no major change was included. That's what the blog post was alluding to. In the before times, a major version number increase indicated major changes. Now it doesn't anymore, which means sysadmins still need to consider each release a major release, even if it doesn't contain major changes because it might contain them and the version name doesn't say anything about whether it does or not. It's nothing but a marketing change, moving from "version numbering means something" to "big number go up".
  • 816 Stimmen
    199 Beiträge
    994 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).
  • How LLMs could be insider threats

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    105 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    72 Aufrufe
    patatahooligan@lemmy.worldP
    Of course they're not "three laws safe". They're black boxes that spit out text. We don't have enough understanding and control over how they work to force them to comply with the three laws of robotics, and the LLMs themselves do not have the reasoning capability or the consistency to enforce them even if we prompt them to.
  • CBDC Explained : Can your money really expire?

    Technology technology
    4
    6 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    32 Aufrufe
    S
    CBDCs could well take the prize for most dangerous thing in our lifetime, similar to nuclear weapons during the Cold War. I'm thinking of that line from the song in Les Mis. Look down, look down. You'll always be a slave. Look down, look down. You're standing in your grave.
  • 157 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    142 Aufrufe
    D
    These are the 700 Actually Indians
  • Unlock Your Computer With a Molecular Password

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    32 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    51 Aufrufe
    C
    One downside of the method is that each molecular message can only be read once, since decoding the polymers involves degrading them. New DRM just dropped. Imagine pouring rented movies into your TV like laundry detergent.