hello

  • 148 Posts
  • 263 Comments
Joined 6M ago
cake
Cake day: Jan 17, 2022

help-circle
rss

these people should be ashamed of themselves and scientific american should be ashamed for publishing them. writing that they asked GPT-3 for consent is especially embarrassing.

they are contributing to this problem: https://lemmy.ml/post/343852

fwiw some other people actually did this years ago and did get at least one neural-network-authored paper past “peer review” and published; this says a lot more about the peer review process than it says about neural networks.

🥱





yep, this is almost exactly the same calculation i just did to arrive somewhere between $0.50 - $2 for an SBC :)


that is true; running a small single-board computer probably adds somewhere between $0.50 to $2 per month to your power bill, depending on the model and the rates in your area, and much more if you use a normal PC instead.





If you have a decent internet connection at home, and a spare computer (eg a raspberrypi or something), and you don’t mind everyone knowing your home IP address, it could cost as little as $0.

It’s also possible to rent a virtual server for the purpose for as little as $5/month, but you’d probably want to spend a few times that to get one with better-than-minimum specs from a reliable/reputable operator.

The biggest expense is the time it takes to maintain it. Becoming an infrastructure provider for other people can become quite a hassle, especially if they come to rely on it and are seriously inconvenienced when you have downtime.


I had to do a double take on the date to make sure this wasn’t a story from a year ago, when bitcoin difficulty actually did fall almost 50%.

Now I see the headline says “bitcoin” but the article’s “decreased by 50%” claim is actually talking about a nebulous collection of things they call “the largest cryptocurrency networks”. But, when it comes to bitcoin specifically, this article is still just factually incorrect, stating:

“The electricity consumption of the bitcoin network has fallen by a third from its high of 11 June”

It only takes a moment of looking at difficulty charts on any website to see that the all-time high was actually 11 May (when the difficulty hit 31.25 T) and as of yesterday it is now down to 29.57 T, for a decrease of 5.3%.

The interesting story here is that for the last year (since last summer’s actually-almost-50% difficulty drop from 25 T to 13.6 T, which came soon after the price dropped and then rapidly turned back around along with it) the difficulty has continued to rise despite the price falling again. The fact that the difficulty climb has finally slowed (it’s gone down twice and up once since the 11 May peak) is unsurprising - what is surprising is that it didn’t do it sooner.




it depends on what dialect of markdown and the configuration of the markdown renderer.

in many places where you can use markdown, images are not allowed.

here on lemmy the syntax in that guide works:

![lemmy logo](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/bbbd6f1e-4919-4571-b24f-4f345b1f6e82.png) produces

lemmy logo

Third-party images are also (at the time of writing, at least) allowed; ![wikipedia logo](https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/project-logos/enwiki.png) renders as expected:

wikipedia logo

(if you don’t see a wikipedia logo here then maybe lemmy has changed this policy in the future.)

(imo lemmy should actually not allow 3rd party images, because it provides a way for users to learn other users’ IP addresses…)



one slightly confusing/misleading thing here caught my eye - “Tor is now the largest network provider in Bitcoin, routing traffic for about half of Bitcoin’s nodes. Half of these nodes are routed through the Tor network, and the other half are reachable through .onion addresses.” … “A malicious Tor exit node can modify or drop traffic similarly to an ISP.

Connections to .onion addresses do not involve exit nodes. The tor relays involved in onion connections cannot see any unencrypted traffic, and they cannot modify anything. They can drop things based on protocol fingerprinting, which is still possible despite the onion encryption, but that is much less of a capability than an ISP routing unencrypted protocol traffic has.

It isn’t clear what “Half of these nodes are routed through the Tor network, and the other half are reachable through .onion addresses” means exactly. If a node is “routed through tor” and doesn’t have an onion address, that would mean it can’t receive incoming connections. If it has an onion address and is configured to make connections to non-onion addresses, then it is “routing through tor” (through an exit node) for its outbound connections to non-Tor nodes. Does it count in both halves of the supposed tor-using half then?



lmao the ISS is literally the least self-sufficient place anywhere in the universe where humans currently live





via the /r/fuckcars thread about this, someone said in February that they were working on submitting a proposal. It appears that the 2022 submissions aren’t on the unicode consortium’s list of proposals yet; hopefully they submitted it!


You call that a TTY? This is a TTY:

smdh at kids today with their fancy emoji-having terminal emulators


if you live in a GDPR country, consider filing a complaint with your local data protection authority


i think DDG is hosted on AWS

not that it makes much difference but the DDG domains i just checked are currently pointing at Microsoft-owned IP addresses


Can anyone shed any light on what the impetus to this letter was? It very much reads like it must be in response to something specific having been widely distributed prematurely, but doesn’t say what it is/was.



In theory I think you can:

  1. put a peer tube video URL in the search box here
  2. wait a moment for lemmy to fetch the video page
  3. comment on the resulting lemmy page for the video
  4. your comment should appear on peertube

However, I just tried it with this video (that instance is running peertube 4.2.0, which is required for some features according to the lemmy release notes) and my comment here has not yet appeared on peertube (nor are the four existing comments on that video appearing on lemmy, nor is the one other video on that channel appearing on the lemmy page for that channel).



like with the use of encrypted means of communications, if the question starts by “but why do people do xyz…” with an undertone of “i very well understand one should not do xyz!”, we’re on a typical case of techno-elitism.

I generally agree, but that is not what I asked here. I did not say “why do people call setApprovalForAll()”… i said “why do people need to call setApprovalForAll()”.

i’m not blaming the users/victims here - i’m trying to understand if the ERC721 standard (which most ethereum-based NFTs are built on) is itself actually as stupid as it appears to be.

it sounds like it is approximately equivalent to the old paradigm where you give a merchant your credit card number and trust that they will only deduct from your account the correct amount of money for what you’re buying. I mean, with all this fancy “smart contract” tech, are people really building NFTs on top of contracts with less security than chip-and-pin?


i guess what i’m saying is that the existence of the concept of “burner wallets” indicates to me that erc721-based contracts are incredibly stupid.


but why do people need to call setApprovalForAll()? i mean, without knowing the details, that sounds like a dangerous thing to do.

if the contract requires people to risk losing their current assets to be able to receive new ones… that doesn’t sound like a very smart contract at all!


currently trying to figure out how to build a linux image for it 🤷‍♀️

https://github.com/skiffos/skiffos already has support for two other riscv boards; maybe adding support to it for this one wouldn’t be too hard?


can anyone explain how control of a discord leads to being able to steal NFTs?

isn’t the entire reason for using blockchains instead of mysql or something to avoid needing to rely on 3rd parties?

please, someone, explain like i’m not five but rather like i’m someone who understands why hardware wallets exist but doesn’t understand why “burner wallets” do


see my other comment in this thread, it can translate offline now




FBI releases wanted posters for two men accused of aiding North Korea (working with Virgil Griffith to “illegally provide cryptocurrency and blockchain technology services to the DPRK”)
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/297266 > ![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/ef9f1055-2fbf-48a6-89fd-4af756e5d991.png) > > The FBI's pages about them are here: > * https://web.archive.org/web/20220526125526/https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/counterintelligence/alejandro-cao-de-benos > * https://web.archive.org/web/20220526125457/https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/counterintelligence/christopher-douglas-emms/ > > This post's main link goes to a `archive.ph` snapshot because javascript on `nknews.org` irritatingly blocks privacy browsers and incognito mode (even on `archive.org`); the original URL is https://www.nknews.org/2022/05/fbi-releases-wanted-posters-for-two-men-accused-of-aiding-north-korea/ > > Here is a previous lemmy thread about the sentencing of Virgil Griffith back in April: https://lemmy.ml/post/228220
fedilink