I only use open source so I don’t have the need to download software. And you can’t get a virus in an audio or video file. So I’m not worried about viruses. I’m worried about users with pedo, rape or other illegal content, but I have all those blocked, just in case I download a whole folder and get a surprise.
I already am perfectly fine tailoring my media to my preferences.
The only way you can tailor the media to your preferences nowadays is by creating images using a program like stable diffusion, all other media may fit or not but it’s not been created according to your preferences, this AGI would create the media just for you.
a questionable and new technology
That just depends on when you adopt it; personally, I would prefer to have some privacy, so I would use it when it can be run locally, allowing me to have more control over my information.
could be the unironical use of waifu.
I used the term “waifu” to refer to the customizable personality and appearance of an AGI companion because it has been commonly used in the context of virtual assistants with user-selected characteristics.
I was shadowbanned just for upvoting your posts. I’ve tried posting in many subreddits where I used to be able to post before, but I don’t see my posts from other accounts. I haven’t received any messages or warnings indicating that I have been banned.
“I have no desire to explain, trust me bro” — @email@example.com
😆 Nice one.
Nice. Personally, I prefer Nicotine+, fopnu, and EiskaltDC++ in that order. I can find almost anything within those programs themselves, and I don’t have to worry about whether or not it’s seeded, unlike with BitTorrent. For trending things that are sure to be seeded, I use btdig.com or solidtorrent.to.
Lemmy.ml federates with the leftist instance Lemmygrad which is the largest one. If you bring up those arguments here you are bound to get ratio’d. Perhaps you should look for a different instance and post these arguments there.
(Also known as the June Fourth Incident)
In Western media, the well-known story of the “Tiananmen Square Massacre” goes like this: the Chinese government declared martial law in 1989 and mobilized the military to suppress students who were protesting for democracy and freedom. According to western sources, on June 4th of that year, troops and tanks entered Tiananmen Square and fired on unarmed protesters, killing and injuring hundreds, if not thousands, of people. The more hyperbolic tellings of this story include claims of tanks running over students, machine guns being fired into the crowd, blood running in the streets like a river, etc.
Anti-Communists and Sinophobes commonly point to this incident as a classic example of authoritarianism and political repression under Communist regimes. The problem, of course, is that the actual events in Beijing on June 4th, 1989 unfolded quite differently than how they were depicted in the Western media at the time. Despite many more contemporary articles coming out that actually contradict some of the original claims and characterizations of the June Fourth Incident, the narrative of a “Tiananmen Square Massacre” persists.
After Mao’s death in 1976, a power struggle ensued and the Gang of Four were purged, paving the way for Deng Xiaoping’s rise to power. Deng initiated economic reforms known as the “Four Modernizations,” which aimed to modernize and open up China’s economy to the world. These reforms led to significant economic growth and lifted millions of people out of poverty, but they also created significant inequality, corruption, and social unrest. This pivotal point in the PRC’s history is extremely controversial among Marxists today and a subject of much debate.
One of the key factors that contributed to the Tiananmen Square protests was the sense of social and economic inequality that many Chinese people felt as a result of Deng’s economic reforms. Many believed that the benefits of the country’s economic growth were not being distributed fairly, and that the government was not doing enough to address poverty, corruption, and other social issues.
Some saw the Four Modernizations as a betrayal of Maoist principles and a capitulation to Western capitalist interests. Others saw the reforms as essential for China’s economic development and modernization. Others still wanted even more liberalization and thought the reforms didn’t go far enough.
The protestors in Tiananmen were mostly students who did not represent the great mass of Chinese citizens, but instead represented a layer of the intelligentsia who wanted to be elevated and given more privileges such as more political power and higher wages.
Jay Mathews, the first Beijing bureau chief for The Washington Post in 1979 and who returned in 1989 to help cover the Tiananmen demonstrations, wrote:
Over the last decade, many American reporters and editors have accepted a mythical version of that warm, bloody night. They repeated it often before and during Clinton’s trip. On the day the president arrived in Beijing, a Baltimore Sun headline (June 27, page 1A) referred to “Tiananmen, where Chinese students died.” A USA Today article (June 26, page 7A) called Tiananmen the place “where pro-democracy demonstrators were gunned down.” The Wall Street Journal (June 26, page A10) described “the Tiananmen Square massacre” where armed troops ordered to clear demonstrators from the square killed “hundreds or more.” The New York Post (June 25, page 22) said the square was “the site of the student slaughter.”
The problem is this: as far as can be determined from the available evidence, no one died that night in Tiananmen Square.
— Jay Matthews. (1998). The Myth of Tiananmen and the Price of a Passive Press. Columbia Journalism Review.
Reporters from the BBC, CBS News, and the New York Times who were in Beijing on June 4, 1989, all agree there was no massacre.
Secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing have shown there was no bloodshed inside the square:
Cables, obtained by WikiLeaks and released exclusively by The Daily Telegraph, partly confirm the Chinese government’s account of the early hours of June 4, 1989, which has always insisted that soldiers did not massacre demonstrators inside Tiananmen Square
— Malcolm Moore. (2011). Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim
Gregory Clark, a former Australian diplomat, and Chinese-speaking correspondent of the International Business Times, wrote:
The original story of Chinese troops on the night of 3 and 4 June, 1989 machine-gunning hundreds of innocent student protesters in Beijing’s iconic Tiananmen Square has since been thoroughly discredited by the many witnesses there at the time — among them a Spanish TVE television crew, a Reuters correspondent and protesters themselves, who say that nothing happened other than a military unit entering and asking several hundred of those remaining to leave the Square late that night.
Yet none of this has stopped the massacre from being revived constantly, and believed. All that has happened is that the location has been changed – from the Square itself to the streets leading to the Square.
— Gregory Clark. (2014). Tiananmen Square Massacre is a Myth, All We’re ‘Remembering’ are British Lies
Thomas Hon Wing Polin, writing for CounterPunch, wrote:
The most reliable estimate, from many sources, was that the tragedy took 200-300 lives. Few were students, many were rebellious workers, plus thugs with lethal weapons and hapless bystanders. Some calculations have up to half the dead being PLA soldiers trapped in their armored personnel carriers, buses and tanks as the vehicles were torched. Others were killed and brutally mutilated by protesters with various implements. No one died in Tiananmen Square; most deaths occurred on nearby Chang’an Avenue, many up to a kilometer or more away from the square.
More than once, government negotiators almost reached a truce with students in the square, only to be sabotaged by radical youth leaders seemingly bent on bloodshed. And the demands of the protesters focused on corruption, not democracy.
All these facts were known to the US and other governments shortly after the crackdown. Few if any were reported by Western mainstream media, even today.
— Thomas Hon Wing Palin. (2017). Tiananmen: the Empire’s Big Lie
And it was, indeed, bloodshed that the student leaders wanted. In this interview, you can hear one of the student leaders, Chai Ling, ghoulishly explaining how she tried to bait the Chinese government into actually committing a massacre. (She herself made sure to stay out of the square.): Excerpts of interviews with Tiananmen Square protest leaders
This Twitter thread contains many pictures and videos showing protestors killing soldiers, commandeering military vehicles, torching military transports, etc.
Following the crackdown, through Operation Yellowbird, many of the student leaders escaped to the United States with the help of the CIA, where they almost all gained privileged positions.
Books, Articles, or Essays:
Maybe the same existing front-end could be adapted to work on tauri. Still it would need someone who knows how it works.
To use AI to recognize a person in an anonymized dataset based on speech patterns, one approach is to use an artificial neural network (ANN) to analyze the social behavior of individuals in the dataset. Here are some steps to follow:
- Collect the anonymized dataset containing information on anonymous users’ interactions.
- Organize each user’s interaction data into web-shaped data structures consisting of nodes representing the user and their contacts. Strings threaded with interaction data connect the nodes.
- Train an ANN to recognize the social behavior of individuals in the dataset. The ANN should be shown the interaction web of a known person and then set loose to search the anonymized data given not just information about the target’s interactions but also those of their contacts.
- Test the ANN’s ability to identify individuals in the anonymized dataset by providing it with the interaction data of a known person and seeing if it can correctly identify that person in the dataset.
Another approach is to use natural language processing (NLP) to anonymize the data while preserving its usefulness for analysis. This involves using NLP techniques to detect different types of entities in free text, such as phone numbers or names, and then replacing them with anonymized placeholders.
It’s worth noting that there are also many other applications of AI in speech analysis, such as detecting Parkinson’s disease from nocturnal breathing signals.
By Perplexity at https://www.perplexity.ai/search/393f6b31-7a52-4e71-b9c8-d58ef6d14bf7
Give him some upvotes to spread the word about lemmy. https://old.reddit.com/user/parentis_shotgun
@firstname.lastname@example.org @email@example.com It happens to me when I click post on a comment very often, or when I edit a comment and click save. Sometimes when I refresh the comment appears and sometimes it doesn’t. But no matter how much time I wait it doesn’t reload the page by it self, the post button just displays a spinning circle all the time. Maybe has something to do with federation where the program is waiting for every other instance to give the ok before finishing. There are times where it works fine but it’s less and less often lately.
It seems like you’ve come across a post discussing the livestreaming of writing a “FEP” (which stands for Federation Enhancement Proposal) and submitting it to the fediverse. Let me break it down for you in simpler terms.
The fediverse is a decentralized network of social platforms that are interconnected and allow users to communicate and share content. Some popular platforms within the fediverse include Mastodon, Pleroma, and Pixelfed.
A Federation Enhancement Proposal (FEP) is a proposal for improving the federation, or the way different platforms within the fediverse interact with each other. It could involve suggesting new features, addressing issues, or suggesting changes to existing protocols.
The post is asking who will be the first person to livestream their process of writing a FEP and then submitting it to the FEP repository. The FEP repository is a place where these proposals are collected and made available to the community.
The suggested livestreaming platforms mentioned are Owncast and Pixelfed. Owncast is a platform for self-hosted livestreaming, while Pixelfed is an image-sharing platform within the fediverse.
In summary, the post is discussing the idea of someone livestreaming their experience of writing a proposal to improve the federation within the fediverse and submitting it to the FEP repository.
A user-friendly and customizable local program that brings the essence of Lemmy to your personal device. With a simple installation process and a single click, users can set up their own instance without the need for a domain. This self-contained program delivers a uniquely tailored feed based on individual preferences, where upvotes, downvotes, and interactions directly shape the content that appears. The software would guarantee a personalized and engaging browsing experience, allowing users to curate their own instance and explore topics of interest within a private and controlled environment.
Lately I’m doing this tiramisu every few weeks and freezing it for when I want to eat some.
The article argues that capitalism uses computers in a backwards way, creating unpleasant user experiences. Computers are capable of taking complex inputs and simplifying them for users, but companies use this technology to simplify the world for themselves, at the expense of the user. For example, customer service phone numbers use automated systems that simplify users, creating an unpleasant experience. Market-based economies inevitably create this type of technology because the atomic unit of the economy is a sale, which creates an adversarial relationship between buyers and sellers. Companies use technology to simplify their sales funnel at the expense of the user, tricking them with artificially low prices and extra fees. Online dating apps and social media are other examples of this phenomenon. While competition may improve the user experience, the article argues that we should not settle for a system that starts off with bad computer technologies and improves from there.
ChatGPT - https://chat.openai.com
YouChat - https://you.com
HuggingChat - https://huggingface.co/chat
The leaked document from a Google researcher argues that open source is rapidly outpacing Google and OpenAI in terms of AI models. They have solved major problems, are faster, more customizable, and more capable, with the gap in quality quickly closing. This means that Google needs to collaborate with what is being done outside of the company, consider where its value-add is, and make small variants a priority. The document notes that the innovations that power open source’s recent successes directly solve problems that Google is still struggling with, and that LoRA is underexploited inside Google.