Using the old interface seems to yield better results there. It appears to be their newer API model that’s suffering.

Fair enough. I missed this push amidst every other AI related enshittification tactict at the time I guess. That said, this is how it should work. An organization proposes a change and the change is withdrawn or halted after the userbase is able to weigh in. I’m pleased that they didn’t barrel ahead with it despite the outcry.

I feel for the Wikimedia foundation right now. They’re under mounting pressure to compete with corporations that hold a monopoly on how people access their sites and subsequently the information on them. The goal is to provide open information, but that information is no less open to the AI that aims to scrape, rehost, and re-use the work of individuals who have volunteered their time to it.

I think it would have been easy for them to effectively do what Reddit did, and lock down the access to the site and its content in order to develop their own AI tools to perform similar tasks trained on their dataset exclusively. Instead, they’ve listened and I hope they continue to listen to their dedicated members who believe in the foundation’s original goals.

Not all AI use is bad, and it sounds to me like you didn’t read that article itself. They have no desire or intention to use AI in a way that directly effects the information on the site, how it’s presented to visitors or to use it in a way that would manipulate how articles are edited.

The only potential note is translation, but translation is such a massive undertaking that by providing a means to discuss and interact between languages, the information becomes more broadly available and open to correction as needed by native speakers.

Also, Britannica does employ the use of AI within their own system as well, even providing a chatbot by which to ask questions and search for information. It is, in this way, more involved than Wikipedia’s goals.

To add, Apple has actually been making amends regarding repairability. It’s small steps, but leagues ahead of what’s offered for popular android manufacturers, while still maintaining their IP68 ratings on most devices.

I can’t speak to how they make their parts available to third parties (seems to be a grey area), but there has been a reasonable focus with the last couple generations of iPhones that ensures the device can be repaired from either side.

Overall, the tide seems to have shifted. If you’re going to be at the mercy of a corporate giant in order to keep up with modernity, then Apple is currently holding the dimly lit torch of consumer rights.

The crazy part is this may make iOS the better alternative when considering the emergence of third-party app stores and Apple’s loosening grip on their ecosystem.

LineageOS is still a good option too, for anyone who would prefer to keep the phone they have

Oh wow, I read that comment and I think my brain auto-corrected. I didn’t even notice that. That’s bizarre

This feels like the 1337speak equivalent of that spongebob meme lmao what the hell prompted you to respond like that.

No, dd doesn’t. It will just plainly write an image to a disk.

Both are great, and I think complement eachother nicely. Qobuz mostly focuses on label offered music catalogues, while Bandcamp has always catered to indies. If an artist offers their music through Bandcamp, I still prefer to make my purchases there, but if the artist is signed to a label then it’s a good shot Qobuz has it.

Either service offers the music in the highest quality provided, though lossless versions through Qobuz do tend to be priced a few dollars higher than the regular album.

I’ve settled for Qobuz. Its discovery features are terrible, but it’s basically a music storefront with a streaming library. High-quality, had basically my whole library and I can buy albums directly for download.

You can use slsk-batchdl alongside a CSV of your Spotify Playlists to make quicker work of this.

Am I misremembering or did Finland begin migrating a large number of their government systems to linux/FOSS software?

People say it because it was a Windows limitation, not a computing limitation. Windows Server had support for more, but for consumers, it wasn’t easily doable. I believe there’s modern workarounds though. The real limit is how much memory a single application can address at any given time.

I don’t feel like this is a terribly recent attitude. It’s definitely one I’ve encountered repeatedly over a decade or more of dipping my toes in the pool. It’s not incorrect in a lot of circumstances, but it’s very difficult to find support when no one wants to help you improve. There’s always been a significant degree of ego in Linux user communities.

Flatpaks are basically containers, allowing applications to maintain their own dependencies separate from your system. It’s similar to a Windows program shipping with its own precompiled DLLs, helping prevent dependenct conflicts when you go to update something you installed with pacman or yay.

Arc support was added after release to Linux Kernel 6.2 and it’s steadily improved since. Older Linux distros, or “LTS” oriented distros that favour stability may still not have support for them. I know Unraid was very slow to pick up on it and I had to settle for passing the pcie device through to a VM to get it working. Intel is keen to made these viable though, and I love having the AV1 encoder from my A380.

That’s not an equivalency. From written paper to typewriters and then to computers, writing has remained a product of the author. A typewriter repair shop would transition from mechanical to electronic typewriters and potentially then to computer repair. This is because it supports an evolving technology.

An author cannot transition to becoming a machine, because they cannot author what they don’t write, but a publisher can continue to publish anything that would make them money. So when human experience is boiled down to nothing more than the probabalistic order of the words written by authors who gave no consent to have their work absorbed and mutilated by an LLM, the only winner is a publishing house seeking cheaper labour than the human.

That one sounds squarely on Nvidia. Any driver that uses undocumented workarounds to gain kernel level access or utilizes an access loophool for system hooks is a bad driver. I’d assume Debian, or likely more accurately the Linux kernel itself was updated following some matter of CVE that Nvidia was quietly abusing.

Frustrating, but a good example of why those kinds of proprietary drivers are such a nightmare. You really just don’t know what techniques they’re using.

Yeah, because at least a decent 3rd party might hand you documentation and have the sense to build something consistent or maintainable. AI has a limited context scope and frequently suffers a type of short term memory loss that results in repeated work or variations in work that confuse the end result.

Biggest difference is that wormhole will pass traffic between devices on different networks as long as both are routable. So it’s not limited to a local network connection.

Ultimately this change, while frustrating, probably doesn’t change the initial value for those who fit these two categories:

• Needs Windows
• Cares about their privacy

These people were already going to go out of their way to use the OOBE bypass. They still will. This is no more effort thanbit already was.

Microsoft crossed the line already by disallowing offline account creation through their default setup process.