Arizona has several long-standing laws on the books requiring both public government properties and businesses to provide drinking water without cost or other barrier to access. Businesses can’t even charge for the cup.
Common courtesy unfortunately doesn’t go far enough, especially when it matters most, so law is required.
This isn’t exactly the type of work tons of astronomers are doing, nor does it cut into their jobs. Astronomers have already been using ML/algorithms/machine vision/similar stuff like this for this kind of work for years.
Besides, whenever a system identifies objects like this, they still need to be confirmed. This kind of thing just means telescope time is more efficient and it leaves more time for the kinds of projects that normally don’t get much telescope time.
Also, space is big. 150k possible objects is NOTHING.
I use it with etesync, but there are plenty of caldav and other sync options available.
I’m not entirely against LLMs as a tool, but I especially despise the image-based LLMs. They are certainly neat for some fun things. I’ve used them a little bit here and there for a dumb profile picture or a “I’m kinda thinking about this…” Brainstorm, but even in those cases I noticed the capabilities of the LLM and its tendencies quite literally pidgeon hole my artistic vision and push me in other directions that felt less and less creative. (Sidenote: I feel the same way about coding LLM tools. The longer I use them at any given time, the less creative I feel and it has a noticeable impact on my interest in the code I’m writing. So I don’t really use them much. Also I consistently manage to point out coding LLM code in PR reviews because it’s always kinda funky)
I’ve avoided using AI art tools for a while now. I’ll consider some limited use if the cost, billionaire ownership, blatant theft of real IP without compensation, and environmental impact problems are solved. (No, an “open source” model doesn’t solve all of these problems, especially since nearly all open source models are not truly open source and are almost always benefiting from upstream theft)
You know what I do like about AI art? I like the older Google machine learning art experiments from the mid-2010s. They invoked a strange existential curiosity. But those weren’t done with LLM’s.
Outside of LLMs, I like that there are some newer tools for editing that can do a better “lasso” select, that can mix and match into brushes as an alternative to something more algorithmic, the audio plugin that uses a RNN to simplify or expand upon an audio technique. Things that are tools that can be chosen or avoided and have nothing to do with LLMs.
I honestly cannot wait for this bubble to burst and for these tools to return to a cost that they’d need to be for these companies to turn a profit. A higher cost would eliminate all this casual use that is making people worse at research, critical thinking, and creativity, as well as make the art tools less competitive to just paying artists, even for scumbags wanting to cut the artists out. And it’d incentivize non-LLM, non-insanely costly ML techniques again instead of the current “LLMs for everything” nonsense right now.
If the split is going to be a longer term thing, I like to run 1 group at a time and have the players who are not in the split group run temporary characters or NPCs. Usually those are something like MCDM Followers/Companions or just simplified PC characters so that there isn’t much of a learning curve, but it just depends on the people at the table.
If the party already has bunch of followers or NPC friends, it’s really easy and people seem to enjoy taking the reins of their favorite NPC’s for a few sessions. It’s also a nice chance for players who like trying our different builds to have a small timeline to try something out with an NPC, and it adds the bonus of shared worldbuilding.
Once the first group is finished, we swap roles and pick up the second group.
Its best to keep this limited in scope, make sure its not more than a few sessions per group, and to only employ it occassionally.
However, if it’s only for a part of a session, I go for the A/B storyline in a TV show strategy and tend to verbalize the “camera” a bit more, especially if it makes sense to give some subtle progress hints to the other group so they don’t feel the need to worry too much about metagaming. If one group in in combat while the other isn’t, I’ll switch back to the non-combat group after every round or two. Gives everyone a little more time to get their bearings in a reduced party size and makes the combat action feel a little more intense with some good ol’ tension and release.
“OK, as Jimothy unlocks the door and peers inside, it’s dark and will take a moment for their eyes to adjust. Swords McGee, watching Jimothy’s back, nothing seems out of the ordinary from the perception check, but he does see a flash of orange on the northern wall of the compound where your friends should be at, followed by the distant, unmistakable crack of your allies fireball spell.”
“back to the rest of the group, Bobby Fireballs finished up last round by blowing up the guard station, top of initiative, the guard captain…”
It doesn’t always go that smoothly, but you’d be surprised how easy it can be once you get in the rhythm of when to change cameras. Its also very important to briefly summarize a hook when changing cameras to transition everyone elsewhere.
If it makes more sense to stay with one party for the entire combat, I’ll usually hand over a few monsters to the non-participant players so they have an opportunity to be doing something, if it makes sense.
National debt doesn’t work like consumer debt bud. Learn some economics. Nor is the trump admin actually using it to pay down the debt.
Anyway, defunding the NOAA to pay off the national debt is like skipping a coffee, once, to pay down a mortgage on a house.
There are some detailed instructions on the docs site, tho I agree it’d be nice to have in the readme, too.
Sounds like the dev was not expecting this much interest for the project out of nowhere so there will def be gaps.
Good to know. I only lost about 30 out of 5000 or so going from Spotify to Tidal. Seems like the catalog gaps for both Tidal and Quobuz have become less of an issue over the last few years.
The big annoyances were some playlists with orchestral and jazz albums that I had to find again via slightly different album names, but those are a mess on any platform due to re-releases and compilations being chaotic enough in that space as it is.
I’ve heard (annecdotaly) that Quobuz is much better for orchestral and instrumental music in general. Spotify wasn’t great for it. Tidal is a bit worse, but far superior than Spotify for Jazz at least.
I’d rather have it in my desktop workspace than nested in a web browser, plus it can integrate better with native media API’s for media buttons, notifications, and other items being aware of the audio, which the tidal web app doesn’t do out of the box.
Yep! It’s a good app overall, even has some improvements over what is shipped on macOS.
https://github.com/Nokse22/high-tide is new and promising for a better experience overall. I’d always prefer native over electron.
Absolutely! It works fairy well. A little clunky since the Linux support is bolted on after, but it’s not noticeably worse than the macOS experience. The extra options it offers over what tidal ships to macOS are also nice.
These non-native electron apps are all kinda junky for native music listening anyway. (This is a problem with Spotify’s desktop app as well)
Tbh, podcasts through a “storefront” is a poor way to experience them. It’s meant to be decentralized via RSS feeds. Tho having some cross-device metadata about what you’ve listened to is definitely helpful.
I’ve been using Pocket Casts for a long time for that more refined experience and ease of use between listening devices. Their new owners are ethically complicated nowadays (Automattic), and the cost for their pro features is a bit high unless you are a podcast fiend (I was grandfathered in from their old mid-2010s pricing scheme that was pay once/own forever), but it’s a good app (for now).
This is great to see. I ended up moving to Tidal from Spotify, and even though there are some nice to have features missing from Tidal (an equivilant to spotify’s sync between devices/speakers as well as a better Android Auto experience), it’s a far superior experience.
Quobuz is also on my radar, but they’ve traditionally lacked in the music catalog space. I need to give them a try again now that it’s been a few years.
That said, Tidal barely has Linux clients and I don’t think I’ve seen much movement for Quobuz on Linux, unless I’ve just missed it.
And yet here you are, insinuating the government should legislate monopoly power over advertisements and simply hand the reigns over to the corporate interests that want to maximize profits at any cost.
I have no idea where you got this idea I’m advocating for an adtech monopoly.
You continue to put words in my mouth and come at this thread with aggression and demanding statements. You dont just get to demand a debate, and you certinally aren’t going to sway someone’s opinion by putting someone on the defense, putting words in their mouth, and attacking character right out the gate. Edit: apologies, someone else was doing the more aggressive responses. Difficult to keep track of this stuff on mobile sometimes.
How did you get an endorsement for adtech industry lobbying out of my other comments? And how would my comments insinuate that I want them to create a monopoly? You’re engaging in some heavy reframing and redefining of what I’ve stated.
Mozilla deserves criticism. But i dont think it makes any sense to campaign against firefox as is happening all over this post. You are the one who began demanding an argument about Anonym on a comment where I was suggesting that firefox itself is still a net good, especially for people who want to continue to use forks like librewolf. Whether this path Mozilla is on ends up working out or not, firefox is still far superior in all sorts of other domains of privacy and user choice when it comes to a browser, and that allows the forks to exist, too. People should use forks if they want to, but they shouldn’t discourage people from using firefox if they aren’t interested in a fork.
I don’t actually give a crap about Anonym, aside from the mission seeming better, nor do i believe I’ve endorsed Anonym anywhere. All I’ve said is thay they are steps closer to a realistic possibility for the current US political, legal, and economic environment to have any measure of privacy in advertising. You are the one trying to put the endorsement in my mouth and reflavoe my words as advocating for an adtech monopoly.
I’d rather Ads not exist. I’d rather tracking not exist. But Mozilla planting a flag on that hill only means they go extinct unless the political, legal, or economic environment of our society changes. And Mozilla going extinct also means the forks will most likely go with it, and that is a far worse outcome than Mozilla doing some ad stuff in a different business unit.
And based on Mozilla providing nothing more substantial than any other company engaged in the incestuous and corporate
I agree the PATCG is a pit of scum. But while it exists and it influences how Firefox will need to operate to be competitive and work with web standards, why should they be faulted for being a part of it?
Dunno why you’re being so aggressive about this.
My first comment that you replied to was primarily about how firefox getting more money through Mozilla being more successful would only serve to benefit forks like librewolf. Its a win-win for Firefox forks for firefox to be more popular and have more resources.
And I also commented about considering what Mozilla is stating their goal as to be a possible better state than the current situation and likely representing the best case, realistic scenario out of the US government in regards to ads and privacy. At rhe end of tje day, the default state of privacy is based on the US laws , bit that doesnt mean that more countries doing better on preivscu legislation otherwise won’t help.
Instead, you are demanding answers from me. I wasn’t here to argue. You could, idk, maybe do some of this leg work yourself rather than demand it from people? If this truly upsets you so much, maybe do something to more productively understand the situation rather than punch people around you who generally also want a more private future with less ads.
So by your silence, do you concede that Anonym provides no privacy not already provided…
What part about my description of Anonym was silence? You could maybe… Go to their site? Read some of the other Mozilla blog posts about it? I’d love more openness from them about how exactly their tools work, and I hope more is shared over time.
Why are you comparing it to Facebook pixels?
Maybe you dont know as much about advertising and tracking on the web as you think. Facebook sells a lot of ads through their sites and apps, but also hosted through clients sites. the data they track to know which ads to serve to eyeballs is gained through Facebook Pixel, which lots of people install on their web sites to gain analytics data from, which both tells facebook who you are when you are on one of their products and also tells other sites using pixel who you are to then target you while present from facebooks dataatores about your activity elsewhere. Putting it on your site also gives you some advantages for selling ads through Facebook, since it gives you targeted data about customers to your site so you can advertise to them where they are anywhere else on the internet. It’s a self-sustaining network of ads > data > ads. Facebook pixel, by its ubiquitous nature, is everywhere which allows facebook to track people across websites to a high degree of accuracy. It’s a big reason you may still feel targeted by ads despite being extremely privacy conscious and blocking ads nearly everywhere. Its just that level of ever-present.
Google analytics provides similar benefits to google for their ad network, it’s just not as blatantly insidious since google doesnt really have a social network to drive more addictive advertising.
This is how targeted ads function. The ads dont have the data, its the other stuff that gets rhe data back to the ad network.
The only reason people use Firefox currently is that people used to trust Mozilla.
Don’t let your bias color your opinion. That may be true of people on the privacy side of the fediverse but its certinally not the only reason people use firefox.
Since you can’t name any reason Anonym is more private than Google Ads, people might as well go with a company that has vastly more expertise in cryptography and security.
See thats the thing: web users aren’t the customers of facebook ads, google ads, anonym, and other ad companies. Businesses are. Businesses either care about being more private, or they care about the appearance of privacy, or they don’t care at all. We as web users have no say in those decisions or priorities in most cases other than to make it such that advertising via trackers is unpopular, ineffective, or pushing to make it illegal.
If you spent some time reading about anonym instead of punching other people in the community, you might have noticed thay Anonym is looking to bypass tracking via tools like facebook pixel and instead using the data that a company has based on user registration, use of the product, etc. Then, they use ML to make assumptions without needing to resort to the level of data collection things like Facebook Pixel do. Plenty of information used to determine what ads to show to someone through detailed tracking can be just as effective as some educated guesses from context in data the company looking to sell ads already has from you being a customer or having provided some intentional information for sales and marketing use, which is exactly what ML is good at. If they truly can provide as good a value to people as Facebook Pixel + Facebook Ads or google analytics + google ads and other competotors without resorting ro invasive tracking, and especially if they can do it cheaper and give companies a marketing win to say they dont use trackers, then there is a chance the future of ads doesnt include tracking. Products being out in rhe market that work well without invading privacy also decreases rhe likliehood of lobbyists blowing up any bills thay would increase privacy. Or at least has way less of it. Its literally the goal of Anonym to provide ads without gaining targeted leads via trackers, but if you didn’t already know that from easy, intentional research, then you aren’t here to get answers, are you?
I’m not here to say Anonym is perfect or that no concerns are valid, but i am here to say that flipping tables and fragmenting the community further isnt going to help anyone. If firefox dies, so too do the forks, so theres reason to hope for the best here and not tilt at windmills.
Anonym isnt built into firefox, so idk why you’d think any of this has to do with other browsers.
From a privacy perspective, Anonym is only providing its customers anonymized data which has no direct reference to individual users. That’s way better than say, a site using Facebook pixel being able to learn a hell of a lot about other sites you’ve visited and ads you’ve seen that are served by facebook.
Web platform security isn’t about having an army of people. That’s a gross oversimplification. And Mozilla already operates some massive online services that are juicy targets for hackers anyway, so it’s not like they’re new at this or something.
If it were up to me, ads wouldn’t be legal but we live in this society and it has an economy that won’t ever get there without sweeping change.
Ad companies do and will continue dictating legislation in the US, so I’m not sure why Mozilla now being an ad company and the parent foundation historically being involved in privacy law and lobbying for privacy measures matters to you so much. Its not like the Mozilla foundation has been that radical historically anyway.
All this mozilla hate just further divides the people wanting something better. We domt all have to agree on what better vs best vs perfect is if were all pushing in the direction of better for now.
Also, if firefox does better it’ll forward the benefits of a better browser with more usage, more funding, faster features, and more on to the forks for those who want to use them. There is basically no downside for librewolf users here and its to their benefit to encourage for normie’s to use firefox anyway
Getting angry at Mozilla for finding a way to survive by trying to offer something less evil won’t solve the privacy problem in advertising. That has to be solved at the government level, and if anything, what Mozilla is working towards here is probably the best case scenario for a legislated solution in the US’s economy.
Also Zen exists, which is a Firefox fork that implements the concept of Arc