palordrolap

They were on Godpigeon business. Or helping out a dog. One of the two.

Did you miss the part where I said “It’s not there as an alternative.” or are you being deliberately obtuse?

The point of them putting Discord itself into their page of Discord alternatives. It’s not there as an alternative. It’s there for comparison purposes.

You missed the point. They’re using it as a baseline (literally their word), a basis for comparison, a control (in the sense of experiment) if you will, before leaping off into the alternatives.

Ah. Graphic novel. Close enough, I suppose. Carry on.

(Take this as you please. I’m no moderator.)

Nice art, but I’m not sure it’s a comic strip.

Most of the age verification things I’ve seen are wise to that and require a video camera, not a still one.

Argh. That doesn’t work. The “were-” in “werewolf” means “man” and there are no humans in that comic.

Unfortunately there don’t seem to be many ancient synonyms for “house” like there are for “human”, so it’s not really possible to obfuscate the meaning in the way that “were-” does.

house-warehouse doesn’t really roll off the tongue well, and it’s open to the misinterpretation of “houseware-house”, which is something else entirely.

Badly translating back into Old English gives hūswāruhūs, which, if you corrupt vowels to “huswarahus”, does kind of sound like a cryptid.

I reckon there’s a few of us about on here.

Good quality teas don’t need sugar.

People are going to add condiments regardless of what purists think. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes. The institution in question is human society. We generally grant the permission to make rational decisions over our lives to other humans who know better that we do or are more skilled than we are.

Sometimes, yes, those humans turn out to have been deceitful or dishonest, but there are mechanisms in place for when that happens.

And yes, sometimes those mechanisms are wilfully avoided by the deceitful. Politicians and rich people are especially good at this.

Guess who’s pushing “AI”? The thing that has no contract with human society and cannot be held accountable. And neither will the people pushing it.

This is why we should have as little to do with it - at least as it is in its current form - as possible.

Tangential advice: Many people use YouTube (and formerly Twitch until they nixed it) as a place to store videos. As in the only copy of a video is hosted there.

If your videos are precious to you (or you think they’re going to be), make arrangements for them to be at least stored elsewhere, if not hosted. That’s not going to be cheap what with hardware prices going through the roof, personally or third-party, but it is necessary because no host is both trustworthy and permanent.

Actually not even self-storage is as trustworthy and permanent as we’d like, but it’s still better than any alternative for data retention.

Also, donate to your chosen Fediverse host(s) if you can.

Fake AGI is like fake banknotes. Some of them are really good approximations. Nigh indistinguishable. A lot of people will be fooled by it but eventually it will be discovered to be a fake and people will get hurt in some way or another.

And it won’t be the people who are pushing for “AGI”.

The people who are seeking AGI will be happy when an LLM appears clever enough to fool them, not anyone else.

They may even realise this, because they think everyone else is less clever than they are.

This is why the whole thing has been called AI in the first place.

As I’ve said before, once Linus is gone, we might well end up with splits at the kernel level rather than at the distro level. And we would be wise to avoid any one organisation’s stock kernel, even if there are some very large organisations providing a lot of code for the kernel at present.

I can see a future where, say, GNOME, start producing their own kernels to support their vision of the Linux desktop from the ground up.

And it’s all but certain that Canonical and Red Hat would be very interested in things going their (respective) way(s) when the time comes.

Any C-levels, current or former, who were in charge during the unethical behaviour should be made to pay this. Either they knew or they should have known. Seize their assets, take them back to basic income and lifestyle and only then take the remainder of the fine from the company.

Yeah, I know this is a pipe dream. These people have their arms lodged so deep in politicians it makes their mouths flap, so it’ll never happen, but it would stop this sort of behaviour right quick.

A question I am yet to see satisfactorily answered: Why would a corporation want to show ads to someone who cannot afford their product?

I was going to suggest using pro-ICE rhetoric dripping with over the top sarcasm, but there are too many sufficiently smart pro-ICE people who’d see through it and too many anti-ICE who might have trouble discerning it. And then there’s the issue of getting the tone right in a stressful and dangerous situation.

New head canon: This is where the Birthday Skeleton lives.

Scientists can and do lie. And they also make mistakes. And when their work leaks before going through peer review, gullible people think that any retraction must be some conspiracy to cover up the truth.

Consider the whole vaccines versus autism debacle.

Now we could enter into a semantic “no true scientist” argument, but again, we’ve got to consider those gullible people, who’ll take anything as undeniable truth as long as it comes from an apparent authority and it aligns with their beliefs.

You may now stab me if you wish.