Skip to content

Reddit in talks to embrace Sam Altman’s iris-scanning Orb to verify users

Technology
154 121 480
  • In Militarizing Push, Russian School Children To Build Drones

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    263 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    142 Aufrufe
    Z
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
  • 138 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    116 Aufrufe
    S
    Nobody fucking cares.
  • 165 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    127 Aufrufe
    M
    I have like a dozen Gmail accounts, and I know plenty of others who do too. Before I owned my own domain, I used the different accounts for different things.
  • Is Matrix cooked?

    Technology technology
    54
    100 Stimmen
    54 Beiträge
    204 Aufrufe
    W
    Didn't know it only applied to UWP apps on Windows. That does seem like a pretty big problem then. it is mostly for compatibility reasons. no win32 programs are equipped to handle such granular permissions and sandboxing, they are all made with the assumption that they have access to whatever they need (other than other users' resources and things that require elevation). if Microsoft would have made that limitation to every kind of software, that Windows version would have probably been a failure in popularity because lots of software would have broken. I think S editions of windows is how they tried to go in that direction, with a more drastic way of simply just dropping support for 3rd party win32 programs. I don't still have a Mac readily available to test with but afaik it is any application that uses Apple's packaging format. ok, so if you run linux or windows utils in a compatibility layer, they still have less of a limited access? by which I mean graphical utilities. just tried with firefox, for macos it wanted to give me an .iso file (???) if so, it seems apple is doing roughly the same as microsoft with uwp and the appx format, and linux with flatpak: it's a choice for the user
  • 257 Stimmen
    67 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    L
    Maybe you're right: is there verification? Neither content policy (youtube or tiktok) clearly lays out rules on those words. I only find unverified claims: some write it started at YouTube, others claim TikTok. They claim YouTube demonetizes & TikTok shadowbans. They generally agree content restrictions by these platforms led to the propagation of circumspect shit like unalive & SA. TikTok policy outlines their moderation methods, which include removal and ineligibility to the for you feed. Given their policy on self-harm & automated removal of potential violations, their policy is to effectively & recklessly censor such language. Generally, censorship is suppression of expression. Censorship doesn't exclusively mean content removal, though they're doing that, too. (Digression: revisionism & whitewashing are forms of censorship.) Regardless of how they censor or induce self-censorship, they're chilling inoffensive language pointlessly. While as private entities they are free to moderate as they please, it's unnecessary & the effect is an obnoxious affront on self-expression that's contorting language for the sake of avoiding idiotic restrictions.
  • 100 Stimmen
    60 Beiträge
    208 Aufrufe
    jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.worldJ
    We all get emotional on certain topics; it is understandable. All is well, peace.
  • 39 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    57 Aufrufe
    C
    I believed they were doing such things against budding competitors long before the LLM era. My test is simple. Replace it with China. Would the replies be the opposite of what you've recieved so far? The answer is yes. Absolutely people would be frothing at the mouth about China being bad actors. Western tech bros are just as paranoid, they copy off others, they steal ideas. When we do it it's called "innovation".
  • 12 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    F
    The new Pebble watches look interesting. Relatively basic, but long battery life (they promise) and open-source operating system.