There are many people who have voiced this topic already. If you don't care about your privacy why do other people have to give it up ? It's a non-argument - nobody cares about your opinion.
No, no, just the opposite: school curricula are full of lofty highfalutin ideas.
I didn't say anything is hopeless. It's just that adding more good and lofty ideas and topics to the curriculum isn't addressing the actual bottleneck.
Explain to me how recording device A "when caught" (i.e., the glasses) differ from recording device B (say, a smartphone) "when caught", with respect to "plausible deniability"?
In both cases, do you not have the person responsible for making the recording (because they've been "caught" as you say), regardless of the device used to make it?
If you do, then that person has, as you say, no plausible deniability at that point, do they not?
And if you don't, then isn't the device type used to make the recording in question, irrelevant?
Because you haven't "caught" them?
Also, why do you care so much about plausible deniability as relates to a specific type of device?
Are we talking about legal accountability, or are we talking about something else entirely?
What do the glasses enable that any other video camera does not?
I suppose that someone could argue that the glasses enable covert, non-consensual recording, and that this behavior might be abused by certain individuals, and that would be a valid argument, but I don't think it could be applied to only Meta's video glasses (i.e., Meta is not the culprit) -- it would have to be applied universally to all companies present and future (including all of the ones in China) who manufacture smart glasses...
If I may suggest...
If the central issue with these smart glasses (made by whatever manufacturer, present or future!) is that they enable covert non-consensual recording, then how would it be if the manufacturers put a big, red light on the front of the glasses, that would automatically turn on when the glasses are recording...
If these glasses were created with big red recording lights that turned on once the device started recording, then that might serve as adequate notification that the counterparty is being recorded, would it not? (You'd rather someone, if they were going to use video recording glasses have them with a big bright red light, then no such light, right?)
So, to recap, I don't understand.
You're looking for a way to prosecute unethical individuals who use covert (or at least, somewhat more covert than a cell phone, let's say, at least until large swaths of society accept the existence of video recording glasses like we already do with smartphones) video recording technologies, such as those found in smartglasses?
I've been building iceblox, a linux runtime that runs Roblox extraordinarily well on Linux, and on the old and cheap PCs (blazing fast on new).
Roblox has no native Linux client, and the usual community workarounds quietly assume a fairly modern machine. If you're on something older or low-end, you're mostly out of luck. My children use 14 year old pc's. We did use Sober, however recently support for non AVX CPU's was dropped which is what spawned this project. I built roblox for my children, but the end result performance wise has been amazing so I thought I would share it with you too.
It just hit 1.0 and it genuinely plays well and there's Bazzite / Fedora Atomic support now too.
I watched the English version video and it seems to have nothing to do with "Stop Killing Games".
I wish them well, but ... just stop buying Play Station? I can understand strong consumer protection for food, medicine, healthcare, basic services, utilities. But ... video game consoles? If you don't agree with "Sony tax" ... stop being a stupid sucker and don't buy their products?
Yep, here in Australia you almost never hear anyone mention it. The silence is deafening, especially with how quickly people just rolled over on this stuff "For the children".
That said it was funny, yesterday Microsoft said I had to age verify my account. I went in basically with the intention of backing out of it at the first sign of over reach.
First step was, 'provide you email for this account'. So I did that and then... approved! You are certified over 18+. That is the flip side of this, some of these companies will put up some of the weakest barriers on this stuff.
For an even more niche language, Roc basically became usable in the new syntax about two months ago (still has compiler crashes, there's a good reason it hasn't had a real release) but Opus writes it just fine after a couple corrections to handle the language's quirks.
This seems like one of those areas where "double-blind randomized trial" sounds much cleaner on paper than it actually is. If nearly everyone can tell whether they got the drug, expectancy becomes a pretty nasty confound
I've heard a similar story before. Guy tried to get Claude to build a thing, Claude said "nah too hard" for weeks. He finally convinced it to try, it one shotted it in like 30 seconds.
My thinking here is that Claude's "self concept" for what is easy and what is hard comes from human training data. Its ideas about what is hard and easy come from humans, and much of that doesn't apply to transformers at all.
I also often have the opposite problem, where I'll use AI to compensate for the fact that I can't process a lot of information simultaneously, but they'll treat me like a transformer and give me 17 research projects in response to a single question.
They seem to be oblivious to the fact that humans don't have infinite working memory.
I don’t understand. It mentions multiple times it’s not free right on the linked page. And if you open the App Store link? It also mentions it’s a paid app.
This is most likely because the vast majority of the information the model absorbed during training was in Chinese. As a native Mandarin speaker, I frequently need to convert the prompt into English and output it in English in order to avoid that the model falls back into Chinese reasoning logic.
PS: Switching the thinking process from Chinese to English can also significantly circumvent certain self-censorship mechanisms built into the model.
CSS is designed for you to apply your own user stylesheet. That is exactly what it envisions you doing. If you don't like web technologies you might want to question what you are doing on the web. However, the web also encourages sharing, so no, theoretically once one user has created a user stylesheet they would share it with others so there would be no need for everyone to create their own, unless they had alternative tastes.
If nobody wants to create said stylesheet then clearly nobody is truly concerned about it. Especially when the time and effort to create that stylesheet is less than the time spend rambling on about it. Actions speak louder than words, as they say.
It's the compiler too. I recently found out that kernel 6.6 can't be compiled by gcc 15. So, even if you have the source, unless it's extremely simple, at some point the current toolchain will refuse to build it.
You wouldn't have to prove that you were or weren't targeting children. You'd just have to operate a social media platform and allow infinite scrolling.
The law would define a social media platform. Maybe something like:
The term “social media platform” means a website or internet medium that— (A) permits a person to become a registered user, establish an account, or create a profile for the purpose of allowing users to create, share, and view user-generated content through such an account or profile; (B) enables 1 or more users to generate content that can be viewed by other users of the medium; and (C) primarily serves as a medium for users to interact with content generated by other users of the medium. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?def_id=42...]
If your SaaS app met that definition of a social media platform it would be illegal for you to show content in an infinite scroll window. Because your application targeted business users who paid for the service, people would be less likely to sue you. Maybe it'd be worth it to you to include infinite scroll anyway. Companies knowingly break the law all the time after calculating that even on the off chance they get caught the fines they'd face will probably be less than the profit they'd make. The larger your platform got, the less worth it breaking the law could become and if the public felt the fines were so low as to be ineffective, the law could be amended to increase the fines.
What if instead of pagination you have the screen mostly blank out when scrolling ? Maybe with the exception of an indicator bar at the left or right to show how far you have scrolled. Could be very thin and functional. On stop it would refresh the page / text
1. Civil disobedience has worked when the timing and circumstances are right. Most episodes of civil disobedience, however, have been ineffective. Remember Occupy Wall Street? Black Lives Matter? The violence that coincided with them was a major turn-off for most Americans. About the only one that was successful was gay rights, and even that was a result of evolving social mores and media portrayal, not disobedience.
Civil disobedience works through the power of persuasion. If you fail to persuade, your mission fails.
2. Openly thumbing your nose at the law is not going to serve you well in court. What did Prof. Bernstein do when he was threatened with legal sanctions? He lawyered up and took his counsel's advice. His communications throughout the process remained factual and respectful even though his disagreement was clear. He did not go onto Hacker News and prejudice himself by saying things like "Illinois legislators can eat shit" and "I dare someone to try to take me to court over this." He was patient, let his lawyers do the talking, and did not get the judge pissed off at him.
I feel like most HNers don't understand that both the legislative and judicial process involve people, not machines, and that success ultimately requires making them happy (or at least not making enemies out of them). They system might not work, but you have to work the system.
