Recent comments in /f/technology
Art-Zuron t1_jef707j wrote
Reply to comment by HanaBothWays in Meta wants EU users to apply for permission to opt out of data collection - Instead of a yes/no consent, Meta users will fill out a form and include justification. by speckz
Because making something prohibitively difficult isn't technically prohibiting it!
cobaltbluedw t1_jef6z53 wrote
Reply to A top AI researcher reportedly left Google for OpenAI after sharing concerns the company was training Bard on ChatGPT data by jack_lafouine
What was the concern?
Head-Ad4770 t1_jef6srg wrote
Reply to Meta wants EU users to apply for permission to opt out of data collection - Instead of a yes/no consent, Meta users will fill out a form and include justification. by speckz
So if your justification is not valid, they basically continue to harvest your information out from underneath you without your consent. I’m in the US, but congrats Facebook/Meta, you just lost a user for life if this starts to be implemented in the US. 😫
Should I just smash my Oculus Quest 2 to pieces with a sledgehammer, chuck the remains out a window, and then buy a new VR headset at this point?
[deleted] t1_jef6s3t wrote
Reply to comment by Bannon9k in Senator Warner’s RESTRICT Act Is Designed To Create The Great Firewall Of America by vriska1
[removed]
YouandWhoseArmy t1_jef6gdg wrote
Reply to comment by WaitingForNormal in Senator Warner’s RESTRICT Act Is Designed To Create The Great Firewall Of America by vriska1
China executes corrupt public officials.
ekkidee t1_jef5yb2 wrote
Reply to comment by tomassino in Meta wants EU users to apply for permission to opt out of data collection - Instead of a yes/no consent, Meta users will fill out a form and include justification. by speckz
Not mine, thank you!
ekkidee t1_jef5umn wrote
Loa_Sandal t1_jef5htg wrote
Reply to Meta wants EU users to apply for permission to opt out of data collection - Instead of a yes/no consent, Meta users will fill out a form and include justification. by speckz
Not pictured in the article: Margrethe Vestager, sharpening an axe.
Yard-of-Bricks1911 t1_jef55z6 wrote
Reply to comment by heisenburgscousin in Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings as Mark Zuckerberg pushes the benefits of coming to the office by Ben_aid
Reasons it's being done....trim employee rolls, make sure they can use that investment in commercial real estate, and of course....observability...control.
Yard-of-Bricks1911 t1_jef4rd2 wrote
Reply to comment by Derfal-Cadern in Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings as Mark Zuckerberg pushes the benefits of coming to the office by Ben_aid
From my observation the folks making the argument you are tend to be older, and I am 51 so.... because they didn't have those things paid for, no one should.
But of course that leaves out how those things often cost less awhile ago.
The other challenge simply comes in terms of costs outpacing wages. And not just current inflation. It's all of it.
Office work puts strain on families, parents with small children, costs of auto repair, fuel, parking, etc. All with little to no compensation increase to beat back inflation and other cost increases.
A company who offers compensation for these things will attract more workers. So while I wouldn't suggest it be a mandate - it should be considered, just like flexible work schedules, more paid time off etc. The US labors under the idea that we are so much more awesome because we only take 15 days off a year in vacation, while we are routinely out paced by areas where workers take 30+ days off paid a year.
We need to quit this glamorization of "work".
Either9523 t1_jef3ygj wrote
My best friend passed away on a Max 8. March 10 2019 flight 302, he was on his way to the UN conference. Was only 3-4 months ahead of Lion Airs crash.... Im glad money matters more than people to these companies, its pretty sad man.
Clean_Judgment912 t1_jef3vn5 wrote
Reply to Meta wants EU users to apply for permission to opt out of data collection - Instead of a yes/no consent, Meta users will fill out a form and include justification. by speckz
I hope the EU will tell these surveillance capitalists to bigger off to India, where nobody cares about privacy
downonthesecond t1_jef3gdx wrote
Reply to Italian regulators order ChatGPT ban over alleged violation of data privacy laws by Captain_Calamari_
Government knows best.
Fredg450 t1_jef35yt wrote
Reply to comment by MotorballPlayer99 in China’s chip industry will be ‘reborn’ under U.S. sanctions, Huawei says, confirming breakthrough by maki23
All you need is to secure supplies, by either asking or taking.
Epyr t1_jef2wab wrote
Reply to comment by SatansHRManager in CEOs are quietly backtracking on remote work—and more companies could follow by ethereal3xp
In some cases yes, in most cases no. The number of people who prefer big cities vastly outweighs the number of people who prefer small cities. That doesn't mean some people don't like small cities, but it does mean small to medium sized cities don't massively benefit from having businesses running from their downtowns
essaitchthrowaway3 t1_jef2sle wrote
Reply to comment by neereeny in Virgin Orbit fails to secure funding, will cease operations and lay off nearly entire workforce by getBusyChild
So one sent satellites into orbit and the other sent tourists into orbit. Got it. Thanks.
MotorballPlayer99 t1_jef2jnj wrote
Reply to comment by Fredg450 in China’s chip industry will be ‘reborn’ under U.S. sanctions, Huawei says, confirming breakthrough by maki23
But you cant drill for chips. You need the infrastructure intact and people to like you enough to do high level work for you.
[deleted] t1_jef2fx9 wrote
Reply to comment by littlebitofsnow in Boeing plans to increase 737 MAX production rates 'very soon' by jas26
[removed]
MotorballPlayer99 t1_jef2drs wrote
Reply to China’s chip industry will be ‘reborn’ under U.S. sanctions, Huawei says, confirming breakthrough by maki23
How is apple going to build their phones if they cant give china chips?
[deleted] t1_jef25da wrote
Reply to comment by Mrpoussin in Italian regulators order ChatGPT ban over alleged violation of data privacy laws by Captain_Calamari_
The ban is temporary and it's normal for a website that doesn't adhere to GDPR. It has nothing to do eith GPT, or the technology itself.
ChatGPt can make your life better without raping your privacy and leaking your payment infos.
Rusalka-rusalka t1_jef21pd wrote
Reply to A top AI researcher reportedly left Google for OpenAI after sharing concerns the company was training Bard on ChatGPT data by jack_lafouine
AI is a potential cash windfall for tech, they will try to cram it in everywhere. They are definitely riding the hype as long as they can. I am weary at this point.
DevAway22314 t1_jef1o8z wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in immortality: Humans will attain immortality with the help of 'nanobots' by 2030, claims former Google scientist by Vailhem
You were fact checked externally. By me. The result was:
False
All the sources I looked at cited the storage capacity of the human brain in the petabyte range, with all sources putting it at >10TB, which is many times the storage capacity of a 2010 computer for $1000
2.5 petabytes: https://www.medanta.org/patient-education-blog/what-is-the-memory-capacity-of-a-human-brain/
10-100 TB: https://aiimpacts.org/information-storage-in-the-brain/
>1 petabyte: https://www.salk.edu/news-release/memory-capacity-of-brain-is-10-times-more-than-previously-thought/
The inaccuracy aside, it's a ridiculous claim anyway. There is no good way to compare the two, and the fact the range of estimates varies by >200x should say a lot about it
GomaEspumaRegional t1_jef1ls8 wrote
Reply to comment by moses420bush in GPT-4 poses too many risks and releases should be halted, AI group tells FTC. by VAMSI_BEUNO
These things are intelligent, and artificial.
So what it is the issue?
SonOfNod t1_jef71kr wrote
Reply to comment by fredericksonKorea in A top AI researcher reportedly left Google for OpenAI after sharing concerns the company was training Bard on ChatGPT data by jack_lafouine
There is an ongoing lawsuit on this issue since some of the AI generated are was so blatantly trained on copyright images that it even puts the watermark on the generated image. If they are generating images with your copyright then that’s a major violation.