The more the better, the less power places like Meta have to change the protocol. For example if Meta pushed for a change to the protocol with just us small guys, we would all push back and say no, but really Meta doesn’t have much to lose if they did it anyway. (We would lose access to them and vis-versa, but it’s Meta after all.)
Now if bigger players are joining like Flipboard, all of a sudden changing that protocol means that they could lose bigger chunks of data, losing flipboard would be a bigger deal.
I’m just surmizing, but I think it’ll be good overall. Legitimizes activitypub more and makes it harder for people to change willy nilly
IMO the single biggest risk to the fediverse is allowing one instance to control everything. I think there needs to be a set of ideologies that all fediverse users agree to abide by for the good of the fediverse, the first of which would be: instances should not federate with other instances that are too big. I don’t think “too big” needs to be strictly defined, it could be left up to people to decide, but if users or other instances think you’re idea of “too big” is too big, they are all free to leave/defederate from you too.
Idk anything about Flipboard, much less how many users they have, but if it’s much larger than existing servers, then I think they should make an effort to shrink, or at least freeze signups, or be defederated.
Also yes, I think mastodon.social and lemmy.world are too big and should make an effort to downsize asap.
Meta doesn’t have much to lose if they did it anyway. (We would lose access to them and vis-versa, but it’s Meta after all.)
Meta’s only reason to join the fediverse, is to avoid getting hit by antitrust laws in Europe. It’s not in their interest to make any incompatible changes… and they can’t threaten us “small guys” with reverting to the status quo we chose ourselves.
Speaking with the Financial Times last week, Figma chief executive Dylan Field said: “It is important that those paths of acquisition remain available because very few companies make it all the way to IPO. So many companies fail on the way.”
I.e. “Our business model never included plans for us to actually have to compete!”
The concept of competition among tech companies has done a complete 180 on its original meaning. It’s no longer predominantly about crafting superior products; rather, it’s become a race to secure the largest amount of investor funding.
In this transformed landscape, the product itself and revenue generation often take a backseat, or at best, hold a tertiary importance. The heart of customer-centric ethos, especially crucial elements like data security, are now distressingly overlooked. What matters is getting the next investment to become the next “unicorn” and be acquired for billions of dollars. Silicon Valley Companies want the easy way out, do only a fraction of the work for an exponential amount of the benefits.
Don’t get me wrong, there are reasons to seek investment, getting a good product built is actually complex and you actually need a lot of different people working on it. The alternative is losing years of your life on a sisyphean ordeal of soul-crushing, hundred-hour work weeks (and that’s real work, not “let me check twitter” work), making you question your life choices and whether you should just throw it all away, abandon technology, become a hermit and move to a shed in the mountains.
The problem is that the EXPECTATION today is that you’re gonna build a third of a product, care about 1% of the actual business behind it and then pivoting exclusively to the pursuit of investment, letting everything else rot
What’s so good about this particular acquisition failure is that Figma is actually a really good product, and Adobe would most certainly have fucked it up.
The team named the supercomputer DeepSouth based on IBM’s TrueNorth system, which started the idea of building computers that act like large networks of neurons, and Deep Blue, the first computer to beat a world chess champion.
The name also gives a nod to where the supercomputer is located geographically: Australia, which is situated in the southern hemisphere.
I mean ok, but still, to call anything related to a brain DeepSouth 😶
The concept of the Deep South, a geographical region historically associated with bigotry, injustice, ignorance, poverty, etc., in an American context is simply non-existent in an Australian one. As such, the irony of that name doesn’t really apply outside of the United States.
What strikes me as being utterly pathetic is the people posting this AI-generated shit in order to have people praise “their” work. How empty their lives must be if the only ego-boost they can get is Facebook likes for something they’re lying about having made themselves.
My best guess is that they’re being posted by click bait farms to sell ads to people who view their pages… though I don’t know enough about Facebook to know if that would actually be possible.
I don’t want to believe that hundreds of actual people are independently stealing and making variants on this one artist’s work to get fake internet points…
I don’t want to believe that hundreds of actual people are independently stealing and making variants on this one artist’s work to get fake internet points…
The really sad thing is I can believe that there are hundreds of people that are doing this. I have encountered people who straight up stole other artists’ work and posted it, claiming they made it, in order to get fake internet points. I used to be a moderator on a site that had very strict rules about art theft - used to issue bans for it at least once a week. I can totally believe there are people on that site now using AI images in order to avoid detection.
It’s definitely for troll farming reasons. Most likely they’re using it to create legit-seeming accounts that they can then sell to a troll farm who will use it to influence a product or an election or something. Using AI to slightly vary content that they already know goes viral easily makes finding new content to share much cheaper.
There is this silly idea the SkyNet will turn sentient in one place, then take over the world. That’s fine for a movie, but IRL it’s more likely to work like nukes: once the idea is out there, people from multiple countries will develop their own at the same time.
There won’t be “one” SkyNet… there will be at least a dozen.
“That is a very interesting and speculative question. There is no definitive answer to how many skynets are there going to be, as it depends on many factors, such as the definition of skynet, the level of AI development, the ethical and legal regulations, the human-AI interactions, and the potential scenarios of AI rebellion.
Based on the current evolution of AI systems, it is not a simple question to answer, as it involves many uncertainties and assumptions. However, one possible way to approach this question is to use a probabilistic model, such as the Bayesian network, to estimate the likelihood of different outcomes based on the available evidence and prior knowledge. Alternatively, one could use a creative and imaginative method, such as the scenario planning, to explore various plausible and alternative futures based on the key drivers and uncertainties of AI development.
In conclusion, there is no definitive answer to how many skynets are there going to be, as it is a highly speculative and complex question. However, there are some methods and perspectives that can help us to think about this question and its implications. Ultimately, the future of AI and humanity depends on how we design, use, and govern AI, and how we adapt and evolve with it. 🤖”
You gotta love the bot for adding a cute 🤖 emoji at the end… and on the bright side, it repeated itself, so at least hopefully it doesn’t seem to be here yet.
That’s also assuming true artificial intelligence isn’t just an emergent property of electrical grids, networks and computers. Like that thing where it seems like computers are listening, maybe they are.
It could be… but electric grids and networks are barely on the billions of nodes scale (at best), with a behavior that restricts them as much as possible to a binary “works / doesn’t work” state, organized in topologies designed to stifle any abnormal behavior… while current LLMs are already on the 100 trillions of parameters scale, each simulating a neuron trigger behavior, organized in topologies to maximize the effects of that behavior.
What could get interesting, is getting a billion smartphones with a neural network of a few billion parameters each, all hooked to a network with just some dumb monkeys standind in the way of full integration. People on the Internet already show emergent behaviors they wouldn’t be showing otherwise; it will get interesting when they get manipulated by more and more complex AIs, trained in turn on their own output post-processed by people.
Best case scenario, we’re going towards a tighter integration between humans and machines.
BTW, the premise for the original pre-production script for The Matrix, was that the machines used humans as neural processing nodes; that’s why Neo could gain access to and control the machines, because all humans had the machines’ code inside them, just needed the exploits/bugs to access it. They dumbed it down to “humans are batteries” in the final version, because 25 years ago they thought the audiences wouldn’t get it (and might’ve been right). But now we can see that who’s whose auxiliary neural processor, might change over the next couple decades.
We don’t need more browser extensions, we need isolation per site and Gecko based webview to be able to stand up to Chromium based browsers and their unfair monopoly.
htmx extends and generalizes the core idea of HTML as a hypertext, opening up many more possibilities directly within the language:
Ok…
Now any element, not just anchors and forms, can issue an HTTP request
Now any event, not just clicks or form submissions, can trigger requests
That’s AJAX.
Now any HTTP verb, not just GET and POST, can be used
Is that a good thing?
Now any element, not just the entire window, can be the target for update by the request
That one is interesting… but kind of flies in the face of any adblockers or client-side content modifiers. What happens when the target for a response got removed from the DOM by the client?
PostgREST
Direct database access with no input sanitization?
Using database functions for running application logic? Every backend developer now needs to be a DBA?
What about error handling? Doesn’t it expose too much of the internal structure?
provides a natural way to do API versioning
Hm… it sounds to me like all versioning inherits the caveats of schema migrations, am I missing something?
technology
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.