Technically, “enforced pay it forward” is called credit. Your debt would then be “the amount you still have to pay forward”.
Of course, this defeats both the spirit and the purpose of a pay it forward scheme.
Technically, “enforced pay it forward” is called credit. Your debt would then be “the amount you still have to pay forward”.
Of course, this defeats both the spirit and the purpose of a pay it forward scheme.
It’s not an article about LLMs not using dialects. In fact, they have learned said dialects and will use them if asked.
What they did was, ask the LLM to suggest adjectives associated with sentences - and it would associate more aggressive or negative adjectives with African dialect.
Seems like not a bias by AI models themselves, rather a reflection of the source material.
All (racial) bias in AI models is actually a reflection of the training data, not of the modelling.
It’s certainly good, I’m not arguing that. My point is, if the wine team is interested, they can fork the unmaintained project, and work on that. Eventually, people will switch over to the active fork. What Microsoft is doing, is helping the process along, and making it easier. So it’s good, and helpful - but not really a “donation” to winehq.
I guess it’s simply the framing: It was a not very actively maintained open source project. So they’ve decided to turn it over to a new maintainer. Calling that ‘donation’ is a bit pushing it
And who hasn’t contributed any code to this particular repo (according to github insights).
The biggest issue is that there isn’t a universal agreement on what causes harm. There is agreement on the basics - murder, violence, etc - but they’re already illegal anyways, no need to ban them by license.
I’m confused… Aren’t HOA reps elected by the people living in the HOA? And generally, democracy should work better on a local level where people know each other, not worse… So why do they fail so bad?
15 hours for what period of time? The article mentions they’d refill in two days…
I like the idea, but I really hate that they’ve hardcoded the provider.
I’m somewhat skeptical. What if LetsEncrypt decided to misbehave tomorrow? Would the browsers have the guts to shut it down and break all sites using it?
It seems to me like a MITM hacker can just redirect all requests to a Blockchain node towards their malicious node.
Actually, that’s not quite as clear.
The conventional wisdom used to be, (normal) porn makes people more likely to commit sexual abuse (in general). Then scientists decided to look into that. Slowly, over time, they’ve become more and more convinced that (normal) porn availability in fact reduces sexual assault.
I don’t see an obvious reason why it should be different in case of CP, now that it can be generated.
Because it’s not a very easy case. In fact, there is no real case.
Because judges are people, not robots mindlessly applying legislation. To succeed in such case you need the judges on the trial and all appeals to all decide to maliciously comply with the law.
You obviously consented that your data can be shared with all Lemmy/Fediverse instances federated with yours, and they can distribute it to Lemmy/Fediverse users - because that’s the basic premise of Lemmy.
Now, I can host a Lemmy instances of my own and get all your posts that way. No need to bother buying them.
What social contract? When sites regularly have a robots.txt
that says “only Google may crawl”, and are effectively helping enforce a monolopy, that’s not a social contract I’d ever agree to.
Well, Columbus himself didn’t conquer much. He established a few settlement, but the real conquering was done by others.
More accurate comparison would be:
Describe Hernan Cortez in one word.
(GPT-4) Conquistador
Bluesky users will be able to opt into experiences that aren’t run by the company
Yea, no, the biggest server not showing federated content by default is just pseuso-federation - being able to say you have it, while not really doing it.
Actually, much of that description, perpetuated by dystopian novels, is pretty far off the mark - and it’s the kind of mischaracterization that makes it harder to fight back against authoritarian governments.
The fact is, the vast majority of people in authoritarian states live ordinary lives, just like everywhere else. That’s part of what makes these governments so resilient. If everyone in there lived a nightmare, they wouldn’t last for decades, they’d collapse at the first sign of instability. After all, there are a lot more people than government officials.
For example, a canny authoritarian government won’t disappear anyone who steps out of line. Instead, they’d provide a “safe, legitimate” way to step out of line, that’s well regulated and doesn’t pose a threat to the government, but serves as an outlet. And most people will be satisfied with it. That’s both more subtle, and more effective, that instilling fear in everyone’s heart.