Also, *taps the "requiring government identities makes your network less safe for the people who really need safety" sign* https://coralproject.net/blog/the-real-name-fallacy/
@[email protected] Ooof. You'd really hope that by the time you've collected enough money for that type of publicity you'd have read at least one article on the topic of your core claims. It's not like government identities making networks less safe is a new idea at this point.
“…reports that the firm had already burnt through its entire 2026 AI coding tools budget in just four months after incentivizing employees to adopt the technology through an internal leaderboard ranking teams by total AI tool usage.”
I hesitate to judge from the outside a situation I do not truly know, but actually I don’t: you absolute dumbasses, wow
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] Something I've wondered for many years since I first found out that many companies 'reward' spending your whole budget before the end of a financial period: what are senior management thinking/smoking when they issue policies that explicitly say 'I will financially reward you for spending more of the organization's money'?
@mavnn @gsuberland Rich people's peer-to-peer
@[email protected] @[email protected] TCP over cruise missile.
@mavnn @gsuberland SOFTWARE FREEDOM WIN: this missile is GPL!
@[email protected] @[email protected] Or this torpedo: lwn.net/Articles/501536/
@mavnn yes but it's delivered kinetically
THE MISSILE IS PROVIDED “WHERE IT IS”, WITHOUT DEVIATION OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO...
@[email protected] source code available on request?
Showing that despite having lived in Italy for five years his communication is still exceedingly British, my still in secondary school son just described getting a 10,000 line multi-month C++ hand rewrite of CUDA algorithms to SYCL merged into a reasonably well known open source project as "not as impressive as the numbers would initially indicate". #facepalm #OpenSource
@mavnn 🟧 it is her UK experience, yes :p
@[email protected] ah, my apologies, I had misremembered. And that's disappointing on the phone experience side, I'm not a fan of phone calls. Especially as in the UK I had a non-zero number of occasions where I needed to ring on my wife's behalf because they weren't going to respond to the female voice with a foreign accent 😡
@[email protected] Yeah, joys of culture shock. In the UK, making sure everything is in writing is a way of prompting action by creating a paper trail. Here in Italy, and by what I've seen in the US, the call is needed to get action (although still suffers from making the whole conversation undocumented most of the time)
@[email protected] Unless that's now his UK experience? I have been away a few years now, I suppose
@mavnn 🟧 I mean, considering the number of things our British partner has to deal with for not having a working phone, repeatedly asking for email, idk
businesses seem to not listen to anything except via phone
@[email protected] Yeah, joys of culture shock. In the UK, making sure everything is in writing is a way of prompting action by creating a paper trail. Here in Italy, and by what I've seen in the US, the call is needed to get action (although still suffers from making the whole conversation undocumented most of the time)
🟧 having to do follow-ups via phone is the absolute worst, 0/10, we should delete the entire phone network and leave only email behind
@[email protected] it seems a mostly US thing? As a Brit, I was slightly horrified at the number of US services that offered, or even suggested I paid more for, the option to have a robot phone me rather than send an email or text. But... why? Even if I was blind, I'd trust my text to speech over an auto dialer.
we're sitting in the same position, I think
@[email protected] @[email protected] I think in both cases there's also a practicality aspect: having taught tech skills to primary school children I can tell you that a sizeable percentage (verging on a majority) have at least some access to devices where they are logged in as one of their parents to at least some services. More than 10% so far have devices they carry with them that are logged into a parents email account, meaning they can (if they know how) reset the password on most online services and then delete the evidence of having done so.
Assuming my experience isn't unusual, and I have no reason to believe it is, I cannot see any way to target restrictions by age that isn't nonsense; a sizeable proportion of children are browsing the internet with completely legitimate 'adult' accounts out of a combination of convenience and lack of knowledge already.
But that's soooo many more words than 'its just like smoking'
@[email protected] @[email protected] ...I think this is, unfortunately, the second time in as many days I've been wanting the "dislike - but agree" button.
just got insulted by a particularly offensive dark pattern: I went to the first online character counter I could find to check the length of something I'd written in a web form, and aside from the character count, it popped up this brazen lie that my completely handwritten post was "obviously" AI-generated. But don't worry, they can automatically "remove AI" and make it "100% human"! By which they mean charge me for an LLM to continuously rewrite it in stranger and stranger ways until it scrapes a "0% LLM" detection score
@[email protected] "Give me money for my AI removal AI" is right up there on the offensively brazen stakes I have to admit.
@[email protected] @[email protected] Hmm. My turn to be on the "other" side: to claim something is true in a formal mathematical sense while not holding complete information seems straight up incorrect to me, even though I have no issue with it being used for "best guess with the information available" in general conversation.
@[email protected] @[email protected] Also, if a slight aside, I'd argue that from a formal point of view if finding out more information changes the answer you can't really claim you had complete information. That's more of a 'my Bayesian priors make it seem most likely that' territory 😊
@mavnn @jay_peper IMO there is no conflict. Truth is based on information available.
In the formal sense, the information available is arguably complete, therefore the answer is immutable. Think mathematics etc.
With incomplete information, the same applies. Truth is still based on information available.
(I am disregarding honesty here - truth is truth regardless)
@[email protected] @[email protected] Hmm. My turn to be on the "other" side: to claim something is true in a formal mathematical sense while not holding complete information seems straight up incorrect to me, even though I have no issue with it being used for "best guess with the information available" in general conversation.
@mavnn @thirstybear we might fall on different sides of that divide, for I consider that statement to be true
@[email protected] @[email protected] Fair. I suppose I associate a level of intent with honesty, while (maths + programming background) I use true/false in a formal sense all the time. I wouldn't claim to be the one true arbiter of correct use of true however, and I would disagree with anyone claiming that the statement was a lie regardless of whether you consider it 'true'.
@thirstybear yep, logically false, in relation to human communication: true(ish)
@[email protected] @[email protected] Honest, but not true? Covers a surprisingly wide range of well meaning communication, especially when you start taking unconscious bias into account.
This is something that has bothered me for a long time. How did we end up in a timeline where we're all continually agreeing to contracts that are allowed to change their own terms and conditions, even while everybody agrees huge swathes of them are unenforceable on either party? We've achieved all of the paperwork with none of the benefits.
Install bonfire.mavnn.eu
Get the full app experience
