DefederateLemmyMl

Would be nice to see the gaming industry pivot back to making innovative games within the constraints of hardware, instead of just expecting customers to throw ever more powerful (and power consuming) hardware at it.

Why would I throw it away, when I can give it to someone who needs it more, or sell it?

Because selling is always a hassle, dealing with choosing beggars and scammers, and it may not be worth much anymore for general use.

For example, my old PC is a i7 4770k… it can’t run Windows 11 or play remotely recent games. I don’t know anyone who could use this thing, so to save a few watts I took out the GPU, put it in eco mode and have been using it as my Linux server.

My NUC uses 6-7W idle.

I have played around with some mini PC’s (minisforum and beelink brand), they’re neat but they turned out to be not very reliable, two have already died prematurely, and unfortunately they are not end-user serviceable. Lack of storage expansion options is an issue as well, if you don’t just want to stack a bunch of external USB drives on top of each other.

Guys this content was by boomers for boomers

Tom’s Hardware sold out looong ago, sold in 2007 to some faceless consortium. The original “Tom”, Thomas Pabst, who is GenX and not a boomer btw, has had nothing to do with the site since.

The editor of this article looks to be a millennial btw.

DNS does nothing for youtube.

I think the problem stems from how LLMs are marketed to, and perceived by the public. They are not marketed as: this is a specific application of this-or-that AI or ML technology. They are marketed as “WE HAVE AI NOW!”, and the general public who is not familiar with AI/ML technologies equates this to AGI, because that’s what they know from the movies. The promotional imagery that some of these companies put out, with humanoid robots that look like they came straight out of Ex Machina doesn’t help either.

And sure enough, upon first contact, an LLM looks like a duck and quacks like a duck … so people assume it is a duck, but they don’t realize that it’s a cardboard model of a duck with a taperecorder inside that plays back quacking sounds.

LLMs are decent with coding tasks if you know what you’re doing

Only if the thing you are trying to do is commonly used and well documented, but in that case you could just read the documentation instead and learn a thing yourself, right?

The other day I tried to get some instructions on how to do something specific in a rather obscure and rather opaquely documented cli tool that I need for work. I couldn’t quite make sense of the documentation, and I found the program’s behavior a bit erratic, so that’s why I turned to AI. It cheerfully and confidently told me (I’m paraphrasing): oh to do “this specific thing” you have to use the --something-specific switch, and then it gave some command line examples using that switch that looked like they made complete sense.

So I thought: oh, did I overlook that switch? Could it be that easy? So I looked in the documentation and sure enough… the AI had been bullshitting me and that switch didn’t exist.

Then there was the time when I asked it to generate an ARM template (again, poorly documented bullshit) to create some service in Azure with some specific parameters. It gave me something that looked like an ARM template, but sure as hell wasn’t a valid one. This one wasn’t completely useless though, at least I was able to cross reference with an existing template and with some trial-and-error, I was able to copy over some of the elements that I needed.

every service will get your ID or photo

To be fair, that’s not how it will work. The site and the identity verifier will be two different things, the verifier only attests that you are not underage and the site doesn’t get your identity.

Still harmful though, because you can be sure that there will be scamsites redirecting people to fake but real looking verifiers for blackmail and identity theft purposes.

I for one will never put my ID or photo into any age verifier ever.

I think there are going to be a whole lot of phishing and blackmail scams in the future, preying on the stupid computer illiterate masses putting in their personal information into fake “age verifiers” to access porn or other adult content.

Ah I see, misunderstood your point then.

I guess that’s also why Google is going to use some kind of AI to determine whether or not a profile is underage. That way, existing adult users of their services are (most likely) not affected.

In my opinion, draconian government overreach in matters of civil liberties is one of the few instances where we should be on the side of big tech companies.

Actually, I don’t think this is industry mandated. I don’t think it’s in the interest of tech and content companies to create more friction to access their services. This one seems to have more to do with the governments wanting to exert more control over online affairs, and of course, over its citizens.

I mean, fuck Spotify and all that, but this one is really the UK government’s doing.

And soon, this shit will come to every country. They’re all drafting laws to mandate real age verification for adult content. The UK is just the first to implement it.

FYI Belgian “site blocks” are still just simple DNS blocks at the ISP level.

You can easily get around it by using any of the well known public DNS resolvers.

Cheatsheet:

Google: 8.8.8.8
Cloudflare: 1.1.1.1
Quad9: 9.9.9.9

Except this developer has created license terms that forbids the creation of “packages”, so he clearly does want to affect my ability to do just that.

Why should he get a say on how someone else installs the software on their own systems?

If I want to build an arch package instead, what business is that of his?

Google Wallet is not so much a “wallet” for your cards but a way to link your cards to their own payment service, Google Pay.

Both Apple and Google had a lot of problems convincing banks to accept their respective services, and even then many stores still don’t support this payment method. A company with the clout and size of Proton has no chance to get their own service widely accepted.

Bitwarden authenticator is free for non-paying customers too.

You obviously didn’t know how it works if I had to explain it was already possible.

If you read my comment properly, you’ll see that I wrote: “I know TLS termination and interception and recertifying with custom certificates is a thing”

And it isn’t “madness"

Yes it is. TLS interception should never be normalized because it breaks the chain of trust upon which TLS is based. It can be useful in some situations, like the fortigate firewall where you control the certificate, but ISPs nor the government should be trusted to wield this power over virtually the whole country. It is a very slippery slope.

I am not aware of any mobile device that prevents you installing a new root CA.

On Android, apps can’t install their own root CA. The user has to manually download it, then jump through a bunch of hoops and deeply nested menus to install it and in the process ignore all the scary warnings that their communication may be intercepted if they install and trust this certificate, and (at least on Pixel phones) they get a permanent warning in their notification tray that someone may be eavesdropping on them. Which is correct.

It is a vastly better option than onerously demanding adults provide their identity to random and potentially adult themed websites where they could be victims of identity theft or extortion

I’m strongly against government mandated age gates myself, but you’re objecting for the wrong reasons. You’re not providing your identity to the adult website. You’re providing it to the third party identity verifier, who then certifies to the adult website that you are an adult without passing on your actual identity. Keep this in mind when you’re arguing against it, because pro-age-gater puritans can use it to undermine your argument.

I object to it first and foremost on principle. I shouldn’t have to request permission from a third party or the government to do perfectly normal legal adult things in the privacy of my own home.

Secondly, there is still a privacy problem at the “identity verifier”. They may swear up and down that they do not store my identity data, but there is no way to prove that one way or another so I cannot trust that my data can’t be leaked through them.

Thirdly, when viewing adult content, I don’t want there to be any association between my real identity and the adult content whatsoever, even through a third party, and I don’t want there to be anything that uniquely identifies me.

Finally, I object to the (re)demonization of all things sexual in our societies. We seem to be backsliding into puritanism under the guise of protecting the children, while we’re doing nothing to protect them from real actually harmful online things that are damaging the younger generations beyond repair.

I have a Gen Z stepson, and all the ways in which he is fucked up by the online world (no attention span, permanent online-ness, no real world friends, always seeking instant gratification, unrealistic expectations about life, an overly materialistic worldview, plenty of manosphere bullshit, … ) have precious little do do with viewing porn.

I know how it works, so spare me the explanation. It’s not that as easy as you make it out to be. OS and browser companies are actively fighthing “rogue” root CAs and making it harder and harder to use custom CAs, especially on mobile devices.

And for good reason, because by accepting a rogue root CA that’s not your own, you’re basically undermining the whole trust system that SSL is based on and surrendering all your online privacy and security to the government and your ISP. Whoever has control over that custom root CA has the keys to your online life.

Rolling such a system out countrywide is utter madness.

That’s a problem is for ISPs and content providers to figure out

No, there are very good technical reasons why this approach can’t work.

ISPs … deep packet inspection

There is no deep packet inspection on properly encrypted TLS connections. I know TLS termination and interception and recertifying with custom certificates is a thing, but even if it were feasible to implement this on millions of client computers that you don’t own, it is an absolutely god awful idea for a million reasons and much worse for privacy and security than the age-gate problem you’re trying to work around.

The problem is that content filters don’t work all that well in the age of https everywhere. I mean, you can block the pornhub.com domain, that’s fairly straightforward … but what about reddit.com which has porn content but also legitimately non-porn content. Or closer to home: any lemmy instance.

I think it would be better if politicians stopped pearl clutching and realized that porn perhaps isn’t the worst problem in the world. Tiktok and influencer brainrot, incel and manosphere stuff, rage baiting social media, etc. are all much worse things for the psyche of young people, and they’re doing exactly jack shit about that.