drawfloat

Most people don’t even know what a refresh rate is. They don’t know why it’s measured in hz. They certainly don’t know what 60 vs 120 means.

If it's that easy then go earn yourself some bitcoin.

Somewhat confused how to read these results. I pasted text that was "manually written with some AI support" to gauge how much was actual human, and got 66% AI. But a large part of that relates to, as far as I can tell, the use of the word 'perception' in the conclusion....a part that reads very human.

Do the highlights relate to just that specific word, or does that highlight extend to other unmarked areas of the text, which is why that would be so heavily weighted in the result?

That’s your opinion and plenty of people in here have pointed out they disagree. It has nothing to do with people not being serious or being unable to envision a situation where it impacts an important system.

Your president and his wife both separately were involved in blatant crypto rug pulls only 18 months ago. The fact you still have freedom of speech has no bearing on whether the country is comically corrupt.

Yes it was.

Revocation of leaked keys isn't a new idea, even Github offers it as an option. It's basic practice.

We're probably at the weakest point in our history militarily, with few recruits coming in. People in government saying they are "going to have" conversations about war with the public (FYI, UK would be behind most other countries on this, many already have done in last 5 years) is very different to "militarization" in any way that would relate to this 4Chan decision, it's not even "we are actually doing something".

Other options available: ruin the company financially, violate the terms of service of whatever system it uses and get the organisation banned, access business/customer data.

If it’s that sensitive and there’s access keys accessible to anyone, it could end up much worse. Nobody said it was without inconvenience.

Given they found a secret key in a public place? No that’s not malicious and it would be odd for a serious organisation to be upset someone immediately invalidated it.

Personally I don't mind it, but would say the main advantages offered by JSX for this kind of work (see: React Three Fiber) are more in its ease of composition and structuring larger projects.

Often in R3F projects you'll end up running per frame animations via the normal declarative property API in the useFrame hook anyway, as adjusting props in a loop is not great for performance. The JSX instead becomes a way to easily understand the hierarchy and nesting of objects, as well as quickly mount/unmount new elements.

But the reader cannot be sure they ARE understanding what you are trying to convey. Maybe the LLM added something you never thought of, maybe it made form to your various thoughts in a way that isn't actually true to the way you would have communicated them if you did it yourself.

The exercise of writing is an important step of actually understanding your own thoughts properly. Readers are reading to get a sense of your own experience and ideas on the topic, if it turns out you didn't actually write the final thing yourself they'll always feel a sense – in whatever way – of being conned by the author. Intentional or not.

Technical documentation, where what the reader wants to come away with is the clear facts on what something does and how to use it/whatever, is a different matter. But even then editing is key – overlong text, unnecessary information, these will again fight against what the reader is there to get.

With that said, if you do want to do it, a disclaimer is at least upfront and may well show there's no intentional attempt to deceive.

It has very little to do with Trump. When he leaves, this shift isn't going away.

Are they? This reads more like a way to stop people reusing their results in other services rather than reducing spam results, but I may be mistaken?

People were jailed over Charlie Kirk statements within the last year...

What's hyperbolic? The trust thing is borne out by repeated polling of which countries people trust. The current US administration is openly profiteering from governing.

I do think it'll take a few years before Americans wake up to how badly their reputation has tanked around the world across successive governments of either party in the recent decade.

Greenland, Iran, Falklands, Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan, all these things probably feel like minor missteps in the US news cycle but they have had a major impact.

Your digital identity would then be under the jurisdiction of the US government, who (despite talking a big game) are arguably worse for that same sort of behaviour.

If anyone has to have this type of control, better it be a local national government that you can in at least some small way influence.

You've never seen someone refer to Europeans or Germans..?

I'm not sure if surveillance is on a par in the UK anymore. ANPR (police run license plate recognition system that scoops up all plates that pass) was a big point of contention during 90s and 00s, but even that has been superseded by Flock (private collection, no major legal safeguards, AI based constant review rather than human review etc).

Honest question, because I am not sure: could they become a gaming GPU company again in a quarter? Or have they restructured manufacturing away from them to produce data centre GPUs?

You’re credulous about the concept of someone working part time?

It’s beyond naive to think this falling apart will not hit the jobs and finances of ordinary people who never touched ai investment.

Probably should be telling the design team to actually use the colours that are approved then.

Why does your username contain “APU”?

Didn't we just have a round of people being fired and arrested in the US for saying mean things about Charlie Kirk?

...yes on the last? Might be in a minority on that one.

I don’t have kids, but I live in society.

City of London != London, the city

The City is indeed pretty non green

“ But the social media ban does not stop there. The provision also requires internet service providers to limit the time kids spend online, and has rules about who can contact them online. These extreme rules will take decisions about using technology away from families and put them in the hands of government regulators. “

I’m not sure that “there are rules on who can contact children online” is “extreme” for anyone outside of hyper libertarian circles.

The EFF needs to start engaging with actual real world, because it’s intransigence on the issues being caused by unfettered internet usage mean it is unable to prevent bad solutions being proposed.

Honestly it might not be the worst thing. Facebook et al were way too entrenched in European society before the geopolitical negatives became apparent. Getting cut off now, regardless of whether it comes back tomorrow, will encourage not being overly reliant on one country’s LLM providers.