Skip to content

Firefox is fine. The people running it are not

Technology
205 106 16
  • 343 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    L
    Great interview! The whole proof-of-work approach is fascinating, and reminds me of a very old email concept he mentions in passing, where an email server would only accept a msg if the sender agreed to pay like a dollar. Then the user would accept the msg, which would refund the dollar. So this would end up costing legitimate senders nothing but would require spammers to front way too much money to make email spamming affordable. In his version the sender must do a processor-intensive computation, which is fine at the volume legitimate senders use but prohibitive for spammers.
  • AI agents wrong ~70% of time: Carnegie Mellon study

    Technology technology
    284
    1
    965 Stimmen
    284 Beiträge
    265 Aufrufe
    M
    You're projecting here. I'm asking you to give an example of any prompt. You're saying it's so bad that it needs to be babysat because it's errors. I'll only asking for your to give an example and you're saying that's confirmation bias and acting like I'm being religiously ignorant
  • 254 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    62 Aufrufe
    S
    According to the case website, it looks like it's only people who own a device made by Google that runs their voice assistant. So, Samsung Android users are not included, but anyone with a Google Home device or a Chromecast is included
  • BSOD is dead, long live BSOD

    Technology technology
    14
    1
    56 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    64 Aufrufe
    S
    Right? I never click these useless links.
  • Using Signal groups for activism

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    204 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    138 Aufrufe
    ulrich@feddit.orgU
    You're using a messaging app that was built with the express intent of being private and encrypted. Yes. You're asking why you can't have a right to privacy when you use your real name as your display handle in order to hide your phone number. I didn't ask anything. I stated it definitively. If you then use personal details as your screen name, you can't get mad at the app for not hiding your personal details. I've already explained this. I am not mad. I am telling you why it's a bad product for activism. Chatting with your friends and clients isn't what this app is for. That's...exactly what it's for. And I don't know where you got the idea that it's not. It's absurd. Certainly Snowden never said anything of the sort. Signal themselves never said anything of the sort. There are other apps for that. Of course there are. They're varying degrees of not private, secure, or easy to use.
  • Theoretical Private Age Confirmation -- Possible?

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 254 Stimmen
    41 Beiträge
    153 Aufrufe
    W
    Did you, by any chance, ever wonder, why people deal with hunger instead of just eating cake?
  • 56 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    P
    I tried before, but I made my life hell on earth. I only have whatsapp now because its mandatory. Since 2022, I only have lemmy, mastodon and unfortunately whatsapp as social media.