The keyball and trackball manuform variants[0] all seem great to me. My one issue with them is that the thumb clusters are not symmetrical.
I don't have money for a svalboard[1] so I opted for an interesting variant found on AliExpress[2]. Unfortunately the delivery person threw the package on the ground[3], so my integrated pointing device project is in limbo until this curious planck-like keyboard arrives[4].
Happy Charybdis user here. If you ask, I'm sure Quentin would be willing to build a Charybdis with a trackball on both sides - he was very accommodating of a change I requested (I wanted ball transfer units). He already supports having the trackball on either side.
It looks great! How do you like it? I think I would prefer a small touchpad because it seems like it might put less of a strain on my thumb, but I am very curious about your experience.
I’m loving it! It was quite the jump from a standard layout to split + ortholinear + column stagger but within a week I was comfortable using it in the office.
No strain from using the ball, it is (or can be) quite sensitive so you only need very slight movements and as another poster mentioned there are a variety of ways to adjust the sensitivity of the ball on the fly via layers for speed vs precision.
It’s entirely programmable, and easy to do so, so if something isn’t working or doesn’t feel right it’s you can adjust every key and ball function to behave as you’d like.
Was also very fun to build - but you can buy them prebuilt too
I prefer a trackball because I can momentum-flick my cursor from one side of my 4k screen (at 100% zoom) to another side monitor pretty easily... as long as I keep the ball bearings clean. I've been thinking about using a metal trackball for more momentum, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
I have a "sniper" key I use to decrease sensitivity for more precision cursoring... but rarely use it (maybe once a month?). I do not have thumb fatigue.
My manager is experiencing the same due to a bout of long covid.
The way it appears he is dealing with it, from my perspective, is he has delegated the things which require immediate memory/cognition to us and is leveraging his expertise to direct us at a higher level and trusting us to execute and feed back pertinent information when we next check in.
While I feel for his worsening condition he has managed to do negotiate this in a way that:
1. Leverages his knowledge, expertise and network to a greater degree
2. Given us autonomy that feels empowering, while not increasing our workload to pick up his perceived slack.
(UK) The govt. does not force the employer to continue employing you - but they do guarantee you are given a fair amount of notice and some severance pay depending on tenure.
The above is in the case of redundancies, being ‘fired’ for cause has a different set of criteria and protections, but the onus is on the employer to prove beyond reasonable doubt what you are being fired for
I would say the barrier to entry is stopping a lot of ‘candid’ unsafe behaviour. I think you allude to it yourself in implying currently it requires a professional to achieve the same results.
But giving that ability to _everyone_ will lead to a huge increase in undesirable and targeted/local behaviour.
Presumably it enables any creep to generate what they want by virtue of being able to imagine it and type it, rather than learn a niche skill set or employ someone to do it (who is then also complicit in the act)
IANAL but that sounds like harrassment, I assume the legality of that depends on the context (did the artist previously date the subject? lots of states have laws against harassment and revenge porn that seem applicable here [1]. are you coworkers? etc), but I don't see why such laws wouldn't apply to AI generated art as well. It's the distribution that's really the issue in most cases. If you paint secret nudes and keep them in your bedroom and never show them to anyone it's creepy, but I imagine not illegal.
I'd guess that stability is concerned with their legal liability, also perhaps they are decent humans who don't want to make a product that is primarily used for harassment (whether they are decent humans or not, I imagine it would affect the bottom line eventually if they develop a really bad rep, or a bunch of politicians and rich people are targeted by deepfake harassment).
^ a lot of, but not all of those laws seem pretty specific to photographs/videos that were shared with the expectation of privacy and I'm not sure how they would apply to a painting/drawing, and I certainly don't know how the courts would handle deepfakes that are indistinguishable from genuine photographs. I imagine juries might tend to side with the harassed rather than a bully who says "it's not illegal cause it's actually a deepfake but yeah i obviously intended to harass the victim"
Because AI lowers the barrier to entry; using your example, few people have the drawing skills (or the patience to learn them) or take the effort to make a picture like that, but the barrier is much lower when it takes five seconds of typing out a prompt.
Second, the tool will become available to anyone, anywhere, not just a localised school. If generating naughty nudes is frowned upon in one place, another will have no qualms about it. And that's just things that are about decency, then there's the discussion about legality.
Finally, when person A draws a picture, they are responsible for it - they produced it. Not the party that made the pencil or the paper. But when AI is used to generate it, is all of the responsibility still with the person that entered the prompt? I'm sure the T's and C's say so, but there may still be lawsuits.
Right, these are the same arguments against uncontrolled empowerment that I imagine mass literacy and the printing press faced. I would prefer to live in a society where individual freedom, at least in the cognitive domain, is protected by a more robust principle than "we have reviewed the pros and cons of giving you the freedom to do this, and determined the former to outweigh the latter for the time being".
You seem to be very confused about civil versus criminal penalties....
Feel free to make an AI model that does almost anything, though I'd probably suggest that it doesn't make porn of minors as that is criminal in most jurisdiction, short of that it's probably not a criminal offense.
Most companies are only very slightly worried about criminal offenses, they are far more concerned about civil trials. There is a far lower requirement for evidence. AI creator in email "Hmm, this could be dangerous". That's all you need to lose a civil trial.
Why do you figure I would be confused? Whether any liability for drawing porn of classmates is civil or criminal is orthogonal to the AI comparison. The question is if we would hold manufacturers of drawing tools or software, or purveyors of drawing knowledge (such as learn-to-draw books), liable, because they are playing the same role as the generative AI does here.
Because you seem to be very confused on civil liabilities in most products. Manufactures are commonly held liable for the users use of products, for example look at any number of products that have caused injury.
Surely those are typically when the manufacturer was taken to have made an implicit promise of safety to the user and their surroundings, and the user got injured. If your fridge topples onto you and you get injured, the manufacturer might be liable; if you set up a trap where you topple your fridge onto a hapless passer-by, the manufacturer will probably not be liable towards them. Likewise with the classic McDonalds coffee spill liability story - I've yet to hear of a case of a coffee vendor being held liable over a deliberate attack where someone splashed someone else with hot coffee.
Photoshop also lowers that barrier of entry compared to pen and pencil. Paper also lowers the barrier compared to oil canvas.
Affordable drawing classes and YouTube drawing tutorials lower the barrier of entry as well.
Why on earth would manufacturers of pencils, papers, drawing classes, and drawing software feel responsible for censoring the result of combining their tool with the brain of their customer?
A sharp kitchen knife significantly lowers the barrier of entry to murder someone. Many murders are committed everyday using a kitchen knife. Should kitchen knife manufacturers blog about this every week?
I agree with your point, but I would be willing to bet that if knives were invented today rather than having been around awhile, they would absolutely be regulated and restricted to law enforcement if not military use. Hell, even printers, maybe not if invented today but perhaps in a couple years if we stay on the same trajectory, would probably require some sort of ML to refuse to print or "reproduce" unsafe content.
I guess my point is that I don't think we're as inconsistent as a society as it seems when considering things like knives. It's not even strictly limited to thought crimes/information crimes. If alcohol were discovered today , I have no doubt that it would be banned and made schedule I
> Hell, even printers, maybe not if invented today but perhaps in a couple years if we stay on the same trajectory, would probably require some sort of ML to refuse to print or "reproduce" unsafe content.
Fun fact: Many scanners and photocopiers will detect that you're trying to scan/copy a banknote and will refuse to complete the scan. One of the ways is detecting the EURion Constellation.
That's not even necessarily a bad thing (as a whole - individually it can be). Now, any leaked nudes can be claimed to be AI. That'll probably save far more grief than it causes.
You’re very welcome to ask for clarification - I kept it abstract because there is a lot of grey area and it’s something we need to understand and discuss as technology and society evolves.
To spell out one such instance: I would like to live in a world where it is not trivial to depict and misrepresent me (or anyone) in a way that is photorealistic to the point that it can be used to mislead others.
Whether that means we need to outright prevent it, or have some kind of authenticity mechanism, or some other yet-to-be-discovered solution? I do not know, but you now have my goalposts.
The case I literally just referenced allows you to paint nude children engaged in sex acts.
> The Ninth Circuit reversed, reasoning that the government could not prohibit speech merely because of its tendency to persuade its viewers to engage in illegal activity.[6] It ruled that the CPPA was substantially overbroad because it prohibited material that was neither obscene nor produced by exploiting real children, as Ferber prohibited.[6] The court declined to reconsider the case en banc.[7] The government asked the Supreme Court to review the case, and it agreed, noting that the Ninth Circuit's decision conflicted with the decisions of four other circuit courts of appeals. Ultimately, the Supreme Court agreed with the Ninth Circuit.
Where are the Americans asking about Snapchat? If I were a developer at Scnapchat I could prolly open a few Blob Storage accounts and feed a darknet account big enough to live off of. You people are so manipulatable.
In a large number of countries if you create an image that represents a minor in a sexual situation you will find yourself on the receiving side of the long arm of the law.
If you are the maker of an AI model that allows this, you will find yourself on the receiving side of the long arm of the law.
Moreso, many of these companies operate in countries where thought crime is illegal. Now, you can argue that said companies should not operate in those countries, but companies will follow money every time.
I think it's pretty important to specify that you have to willingly seek and share all of these illegal items. That's why this is so sketch. These things are being baked with moral codes that'll _share_ the information, incriminating everyone. Like why? Why not just let it work and leave it up to the criminal to share their crimes? People are such authoritarian shit-stains, and acting like their existence is enough to justify their stance is disgusting.
It’s my anecdotal experience that this really was not the case at boarding school.
Yes - it’s tough being separated from parents and family at a young age
Yes - of course there are bullies at school. Has anyone attended any institution where they don’t exist? I see them regularly in families, workplaces, academia and local communities.
It’s a different lived experience compared to traditional schooling for sure. But I enjoyed great camaraderie, and continue to enjoy lifelong friendships with those I spent my time with.
My point essentially is - don’t assume on the basis that someone attended boarding school they are emotionally inept or incomplete which is the impression I got from this article
My interpretation of your quote was that the boiling wasn’t referring to the heat produced, but instead the idea that mass (our planet) is being converted to energy, reducing the mass of the planet
This may be technically correct, but all the sunlight falling on the ground (which is about 10,000 times our current power usage) is about a kilogram per second under E=mc^2 — it isn't going to be measurable on the timescale of this planet's future existence before being consumed by the sun or ejected from the system due to orbital instabilities, and only even significant compared to the current planetary mass over time periods significantly longer than when all stars in the universe will finish burning all their fuel.
