Skip to content

Supreme Court to decide whether ISPs must disconnect users accused of piracy

Technology
160 121 0
  • 32 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    M
    At the company I work for we had one best korean for two weeks before he got suspended. From what I understand the providers of corpo spyware that they put on your laptop enables them to detect patterns that are common in setups like that.
  • A Tech-Backed Influencer Wants to Replace Teachers With AI

    Technology technology
    32
    1
    114 Stimmen
    32 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    sturgist@lemmy.caS
    Heck yeah! Gotta watch that again, thank you kind stranger!
  • 816 Stimmen
    199 Beiträge
    117 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).
  • 66 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    M
    FYI- insurance company data breaches impact more than just customers. I had my identity stolen a few years ago because a small car insurance company I've never heard of was able to buy data on me from my state's government to build a potential customer profile, and then they got hacked. I would assume Aflac has data on just about everyone in the US.
  • Best way to block distractions

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 462 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    41 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.
  • 31 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 588 Stimmen
    77 Beiträge
    35 Aufrufe
    F
    When a Lemmy instance owner gets a legal request from a foreign countries government to take down content, after they’re done shitting themselves they’ll take the content down or they’ll have to implement a country wide block on that country, along with not allowing any citizens of that country to use their instance no matter where they are located. Block me, I don’t care. You’re just proving that you can’t handle the truth and being challenged with it.