To be thorough, you should check your domain names for any characters that can be changed by a single bit flip. It probably will not look right as far as spelling, but the idea is that eventually something like a cosmic ray will pass through a memory chip and flip that single bit for a connection, and they get redirected to another site set up to handle the request. It's a thing. It takes patience, but but does work. People were doing this to fbcdn.com and other large targets years back.
I have no proof, but this just figures. It's entirely plausible that google gave some heavy-duty major dark money campaign donations and have used the return on their investment to avoid being broken up. Maybe I'm just cynical and the corporations and ultra-wealthy wouldn't really do anything like that all the time. They are ultra-greedy, though.
You should probably learn how courts work so you can construct hypotheses that are consistent with observations. In this case, that the outcome was due to the ruling of a "liberal" judge, and not because the government withdrew its case.
> Sergey Brin ($154 billion), the co-founder of Alphabet and seventh-richest man in the world, joined Musk, Bezos and others in being seated behind Trump during the swearing-in.
You aren't cynical. Big tech absolutely bent the knee and are now wearing red kneepads.
I run all my own stuff local-first, but I am also a systems and networking engineer and understand all of the concepts so I can build it properly. It takes time, and the willingness to do so. If you don't already have the knowledge to set things like this up, and are really doing it to save money as a consumer, then Google Photos as a product is more of a fit and the user will definitely have a better experience.
For someone like me, it's easy and quick and I have a very robust incremental backup system with air-gapped copies. So it does save me money, because it only takes my time and knowledge.
There is no absolute answer, because it's subjective depending on the needs of the user.
What scares me is AI running in a humanoid robot. Maybe it's time to listen to Isaac Asimov and implement the three laws of robotics. Maybe it's past time.
The government isn't big brother, they just let mega corps do all of the spying via "ads" and then just buy your data from a data broker to whom you let have all of your personal information for game on your phone that gives you a little dopamine hit.
We somehow let corporations just take the data that we all create every day and then sell it and make billions in profit.
I want that to change. I want to own any and all data I create interacting with anything anywhere, to be copyright by me, in an enforcable way. I should get paid for the data I generate. The problem is that as long as we, collectively, allow ads that spy on us in exchange for really nothing other than amusement and that pursuit of the next dopamine hit we get. I can't enforce agency and ownership of the data I create unless we, collecively, change the rules. We have the power to do that by voting for the candidates that speaks to the issues you care about. We also need to tell politicians what we want, because if we do not, nothing will change. I think the data we create should be automatically copyright of the person generating it, so I can make money from my data if I choose, or not to, if I don't.
Don't you want to own and make money from the data you create every single day?
The CEO of a company that spies on people, and now detects signals from your phone to connect the car to a driver, got scared and had Google blur his house. That is the height of hypocrisy. His home address is also public information, available from the City Clerks office for free. People won't need to find the exact address, just look for the only blurred house on his street. It's all utterly ridiculous. Clearly the citizens of the USA do not want flock in their communities so the CEO of the company isn't going to be popular, but he could fix that by removing flock from the communities that ban it.
Flock CEO should take a hint. If his product is being actively attacked and destroyed, he is lucky it's only the cameras. At least so far. One guy was already arrested, but the jury refused to convict him. If I were a juror on a case involving someone destroying a flock camera, there's no way I would vote to convict. The People just don't want this shit. Even the dems and gop agree this is uncool.
I only run local models and I don't give them access to much externally. I don't do anything serious with it, but it comes in handy and I know that they can do so much more. I'm on a meager RTX 3060 12GB and a GTX 1660 Ti with 6GB for some extra vram space. When I first started playing with local models, I was really impressed with what I was able to achieve locally.
That's great, but the thing that worries me is that many companies have billions invested in the AI bubble. It's around 1.5 trillion last time I looked. It's all circular spending between the companies building out the infrastructure, and the models. None of it is profitable. They will want to recoup that 1.5 trillion from consumers, which means using online-only pay-as-you-go cloud models. They will inevitably see that people using capable local AI are "lost customers" and they will try to kill the ability to locally host AI or somehow enshitify it enough to make paying a subscription more palatable.
I'm not saying I believe that will happen, I'm just worried that it will. Is anyone else worried about that as well?
I am very excited that more makers will come up with fast memory for consumers rather than enterprise. Companies can only pre order so much RAM.
At some point there will be a surplus of fast memory and even in a crash the current generation of SLMs are bounced to be plenty to build a lot of intelligence at home.
reply