They’re saying Windows will lock away some customization, but you don’t need a key to use it nowadays.

copyright is a matter of law, and nothing else

This assertion dismisses the ethical considerations often intertwined with legal principles. Laws (including copyright laws) are influenced by moral and ethical values, and there are often huge books on theories about the validity of certain things which serve as the starting point of collections of laws.

the immorality is how companies wield it like a cudgel to entrench their control over culture

While some companies do exploit copyright laws, not all companies use it in this way and whether it brings more harm than good is a point of discussion. But it can’t be generalized.

This completely overlooks the positive aspects of copyright as well, such as protecting the rights of individual creators and ensuring they can earn something from their own work.

Possibly preventing being locked out of the EU.

The whole thread is just nonsense though. People went from “Apple restricts local LLM inference in Xcode development to 16GB” to “Apple admits 8GB is useless” and a lot of people who never researched anything about the problems of the traditional memory architecture criticizing the unified memory model without understanding it.

In this particular case the RAM is part of the chip as an attempt to squeeze more performance. Nowadays, processors have become too fast but it’s useless if the rest of the components don’t catch up. The traditional memory architecture has become a bottleneck the same way HDDs were before the introduction of SSDs.

You’ll see this same trend extend to Windows laptops as they shift to Snapdragon processors too.

It doesn’t have to become waste, it can be sold to someone that doesn’t need more.

And unfortunately this seems to be the future with the shift to ARM, even Windows laptops won’t be upgradable with the new unified memory architecture of Snapdragon chips.

To be fair, it seems that even Windows ARM machines will have soldered RAMs.

So by your definitions, any computer can be having experiences?

I was gonna say that. Imagine trusting some weapon instructed by a fine-tuned LLM that has no logic embedded in it.

I don’t currently use a VPN but my impression is that nowadays I’d be greeted with captchas everywhere, is that wrong?

YouTube hasn’t gone down that route yet.

And if they ever do, I’m sure at least 90% of premium users will cancel immediately. I like the quality of the curated channels I subscribe, but I won’t die if I don’t watch YouTube anymore. In the end it’s just the same type of content that could be a blog just as well, but unfortunately most people nowadays don’t read anymore.

The creator is already compensated as of now. They earn more if a premium user watches their video than a free user with YouTube ads.

So the sponsor is giving them more money regardless of whether the user is premium or not, which for them is probably a good deal but for us it feels like being double charged.

It’s just how machine learning has been since ever.

We only know the model’s behavior by testing, hence we only know more or less the behavior in relation to the amount of testing that was done. But the model internals has always been a black box of numbers that individually mean nothing and if tracked which neurons fire here and there it’ll appear just random, because it probably is.

Remember the machine learning models aren’t carefully designed, they’re just brute-force trained for a long time and have the numbers adjusted again and again whenever the results look closer or further away from the desired output.

So how come so many websites simply block VPNs with captchas? There seems to be a range of IPs that popular VPNs use and are widely known.

Doing that would require significantly more compute power, so there’s little economic incentive.

It’s a common trap for certain types of people to assume technology can fix problems that are inventive or socially driven.

In case people didn’t know what company he was referring to. /s

But the thing with users is that their learning depends on their motivation. Just like we all, they don’t care about something until it becomes an inconvenience and then there’s a reason to learn.

So as long as there are resources to learn when you need it, I don’t think that’s a problem.

But it is unreasonable to expect the average users to care about what the file structure should be when current computers can search through anything in 1 second and they think it’s good enough.

I’ve been reading the book “A Small Matter of Programming” which discusses a bit end users relationships with computers.

I think people who are into computers get surprised to know most people just don’t care about how computers work and they shouldn’t have to. They want software that is easy to use and allows them to complete their task. Ex: a spreadsheet is an incredibly powerful software that hides anything about how computers work but still allow users to create multiple different “apps” by effectively programming.

This is one reason Apple is so successful and a lot of tech users don’t understand it. Apple creates “abstractions” so that end users don’t have to deal with low level details — something they don’t want to. They want to see the machine as a black box that just provides them some service easily and smoothly.

Most of the “decaying” tech skills people say are actually stuff people don’t need to know nowadays. Everything is an abstraction anyway, and most people tinkering with desktop computers aren’t aware of how the graphics software is rendering the screen, for example.

lol should have been an anonymous report.