nerdjon

> So if the technical challenges are solved and the AI acting is quite good, that changes your view of it?

That "if" seems to be the running thing with everything AI right now. "If" we can fix hallucinations. "If" we can make it actually think and reason. "If" we can make a general AI system. And so on.

"IF" we actually hit that point that these systems can create truly creative genuine work instead of being nothing more than predictive engines than maybe we can revisit this conversation. But the fact is we are not there and we are nowhere near there considering we are still just iterating on the fundamental problem of these just being predictive engines.

> Actors have worked alongside CGI characters for many decades, I remember watching Who Framed Roger Rabbit in the late 80s.

Yes you are right, but there is a pretty massive difference between knowing what the fake thing will do that is already scripted, storyboarded, etc (ultimately controlled by a human the entire time) vs an AI thing that will be an unknown.

As if we did not need to worry enough about AI slop writing being injected into movies, now we get AI slop acting. Guess it was nice having some culture that actually grew for a bit... now we just constantly repeat everything and never deal with problems in any real way.

Seriously though, practically I just don't understand how this would work unless the entire movie was just CGI, AI Generated, whatever to begin with if real actors are supposed to work with a fake thing like this.

Looking at Bioware's history they are also an interesting company.

It does seem like they tried to avoid just becoming the "Mass Effect and Dragon Age" developer but that did not really work that well for them. Maybe that turned out to be a distraction. I think it also did not help that everything they put out was compared to both of those and seemed to have an expectation that it had to be as big or was a failure.

It isn't like they had a constant stream of massive hits. Don't get me wrong I love Jade Empire but how many people actually remember that game exists?

Likely also did not help that their 2 biggest IP's also had gameplay that very different from eachother.

I am (or maybe was until this news) cautiously optimistic about the next Mass Effect.

Honestly I disagree and I feel like this is largely parroted without playing the games.

SWTOR was maintained pretty well for a while and was fun.

The issues with ME3's ending were blown way out of proportion and was still a fantastic trilogy.

Andromeda had its issues no doubt about it but I am still mad at a certain website deciding that they were going to just go hard on attacking it. It was a fun game, it had some development issues and some nasty bugs at launch. But was still fun.

Anthem... man that game had potential but just was not ready to ship. Was a ton of fun to play and I loved the bits of story we got but it really was just a tease of a story sadly.

DA Veilguard... definitely not up to the standard that Bioware set but there is still something uniquely Bioware about the characters that I fell in love with. That games potential was not helped by a vocal minority being mad about one specific character and not caring about anything else in the game.

Has Bioware gone down since their peak? Yeah. But I think claims that they are dead are overblown and people parroting it on youtube for clicks sure isnt helping that sentiment. Play the games and make your own decision.

I am finding myself having some conflicted feelings on this.

First, I absolutely hate who is buying them. Especially as a huge Bioware fan with a Mass Effect tattoo.

That being said, putting aside who is buying them for a moment. I would actually be happy to see more gaming companies going fully private. I feel like the need for constant growth (instead of just sustainability) is what has caused much of the issues in the current gaming market.

So not exactly super excited about how exactly this is happening, but I do hope that we can see other gaming companies do it with better sources.

> The project began after a meeting in 2021 between Microsoft’s chief executive, Satya Nadella, and the unit’s then commander, Yossi Sariel.

This seemed completely glossed over in the article (never revisited beyond this) but seems to imply that Satya must have at least known something about what was happening?

Or was he mislead, told partial truths, or something?

Very curious who within Microsoft knew anything about what was happening.

So is any of S3 powered by SSD's?

I honestly figured that it must be powered by SSD for the standard tier and the slower tiers were the ones using HDD or slower systems.

This is just incredibly defeatist on everyone talking here.

Here we have irrefutable evidence of just how bad the result of using AI would be and yet... the response is just that we need to accept that there is going to be damage but keep using it?!?

This isn't a tech company that "needs" to keep pushing AI because investors seem to think it is the only path of the future. There is absolutely zero reason to keep trying to shoehorn this tech in places it clearly doesn't belong.

We don't need to accept anything here. Just don't use it... why is that such a hard concept.

Worth mentioning that if you want a free way to do this that does not require running additional software.

All you have to do is have a video you want to use, download one of apple's through settings, go to the location of the downloaded background (I don't remember where that is right now but a quick google search would take care of this), rename your file to the name of apple's file and then replace it.

Mac will act as if this video is the right video and use it without complaints. Until apple starts doing any checksum checks on these files I doubt this method will break anytime soon.

This has been working flawlessly for me for a while now.

This may take some finagling to make sure that your video file is not so large that your Mac can't handle it and that you are using the right format. But it is not hard to do.

The framing of this article I find quite disappointing from NPR. Sure employers are not about to just hand out free money are going to try to spend as little as possible but to put your employer in the same space as the others or even the government is a... wild interpretation of the problem.

I was half expecting there to be something in here about the average that employers were spending going down to justify the headline but that was nowhere to be found.

> "It's kind of hidden, because [premium deductions are] coming out of your paycheck and if you're not paying close attention, it may not be obvious,

I have to ask, who the hell is not looking at the amount that is coming out of their paycheck when it comes to open enrollment? Sure you may just accept it since what is your choice, but I think the systems I use generally show how much it is going to change.

Am I just becoming more sensitive to clickbait that outright lies or are headlines getting worse? Nothing in this article justifies any blame to your employer.

This leads to some interesting questions. Were the people on the North Korean side working given access to more information about the world than the average citizen?

I would have to imagine they have to know more just to be able to interact normally with other people. I would think at some point in a meeting a casual conversation about current events would come up and if they did not know much about the outside world it would be a very weird (and likely raising some red flags) conversation.

Or were these interactions only ever over text, so no camera or anything which would help obfuscate that. It would also minimize the chance of there being those more causal human conversations.

That is good to know then, I am really just using this for smaller volumes. My media is sitting at about the same size yours is and instead of using PVC's I just have it mounting a straight NFS share specifically for that to avoid any issues there.

I think I am likely keeping most of my storage just setup with a storage class that uses my NFS as storage. But longhorn will be used for the things that need to be faster like the databases. I moved jellyfin over to Longhorn and it went from being borderline unusable while metadata was grabbed to actually working well.

I can't imagine my biggest volume being more than 100gb, and even that is likely a major over estimation on my part.

It is interesting seeing this article come up since just yesterday I setup longhorn in my homelab cluster needing better performance for some tasks than NFS was providing so I setup a raid on my r630 and tried it out.

So far things are running well but I can't shake this fear that I am in for a rude awakening and I loose everything. I backups but the recovery will be painful if I have to do it.

I will have to take a look at rook since I am not quite committed enough yet (only moved over 2 things) to switch.

The worst part is you don't even need to open the article anymore to know what it is.

It seems it is always video games or mental health (or both for a double whammy), can't possibly be anything else.

As far as debunking, since when have facts mattered to this guy in particular. Especially given the last few months.

So you be perfectly fine being arrested for doing nothing wrong and being somewhere completely legally just because there was a "month's long investigation" (whatever that means in this administration...).

and... thats a good thing?!?

Honestly I am not sure the point you are trying to make. In what world is that at all ok?

You know damn well that if they raided a largely white work site people would be up in arms (people are already up in arms, but who would be up in arms would be different). But clearly its fine since they are not white, perfectly normal to detain people before making sure they should be detained.

I really wish the US could get more of this. I know here in Boston this has been a hot issue with the summer shutdown of Newberry on Sunday.

Drivers will come out of nowhere and complain, will start suddenly caring about people with disabilities (of course in no car areas we will figure out how emergency vehicles, deliveries, and people with disabilities will get around).

Sure our public transit system needs a lot of work, but that is not an argument for keeping the current car centric system we have in place now.

Cars obviously have their use cases and I can also understand why most of the US will never do this. But the car culture within cities is insane.

I find myself somewhere in the middle. I think for the vast majority of games this would largely be a negative. Anything heavily story driven this would just cause issues and I think would largely ruin the experience.

I think sandbox games like animal crossing are the exception, if it ever becomes reliable enough to put in anything other than an M rated game.

Animal Crossing, the Sims, Cult of the Lamb, and similar games would infinitely extend the life of the game. But I am sure we can all already imagine the headlines when these "family" games start saying things that they really should not be... especially given recent issues.

For the record, not dismissing the person who did this work. But doing this commercially has its risks.

I think it is just generally the correct approach. It was not that long ago that ML (outside of research) was often talked about but it being ML was not the focus. The focus was on the actual benefits and what it did.

Of course this is going to be spun and turned into a negative, but I basically want ML to be invisible again. The benefits being clear, but the underlying tech no longer mattering.

What is with this need for a single application to do so many different tasks instead of just being focused on doing its job and doing it well (browsing the web in this case).

I just don't understand how they can with a straight face say "Today’s browsers weren’t built for work." when their entire business relies on browsers ability to do exactly that and have basically been fine (heavy javascript usage in Jira aside which this is not going to magically fix).

Looking at any of this I just don't see what this is actually supposed to solve.

Putting aside that the title and the tweet very much do not line up since there is no announcement that they are in fact making printers...

This would be interesting and would love to see it, but I just can't imagine it would be viable financially. The scale just doesn't line up for a company of this size.

How many people have printers at home anymore, and even if they went after offices looking at only a couple per (most) offices at most unless you are specifically an organization that does a lot of printing.

Laptops, yeah one per person. Printers, 1 for every few hundred employees? Would they even sell enough for it to make sense for a brand that is not as well known as the major players.

It did for me too, I still travel to some things.

But it did show me that a lot of things were unnecessary to travel too and were just fine virtually.

It isnt go back to how it was before or all virtual, there is a middle ground of traveling and in person when it is actually valuable instead of just being yet another conference.

Do you mean Trump or Elon? No where am I stating that Elon is anti-science, only that he helped get an anti-science administration in place.

As far as Trump (and the administration in general) being anti-science. I really don't think I need to list examples of this.

As mentioned in the article, I think the single biggest reason was that Covid largely showed us that it is not strictly necessary to physically be together for everything.

Conferences, announcements, etc all happened virtually and things were largely fine. Sure things like networking were lost (and the associated drinking), and while that was valuable was not necessarily the marketed reason for the events.

We see the same thing outside of the professional space. Video Game conventions for example never really bounced back because the larger companies found out they can do things on their own terms virtually. Those conventions are still happening but they are not the same.

I do sometimes miss the free traveling but I also find it far more convenient (and less of an impact on my life outside of work) to do these things virtually.

I am stating an example due to the current political discourse over climate change not that it would be something they specifically would not do.

My point with stating it, is it is not unreasonable to ask the question if we are reliant on a company with someone like Elon owning it is what the company will and will not fly going to be dependent on politics.

This is something I am finding myself wrestling with a lot right now.

On the one hand I am a major space nerd and I see the value of what SpaceX is doing. Especially with it really seeming like no one is anywhere near their level. What kind of scientific advancements will be possible once this thing can be used normally and launches like this become commonplace.

But at the same time it is impossible to ignore the Elon situation. And that also directly relates to Trump as well. We are in this bonkers situation where he helped get a largely anti-science administration in power and yet also runs one of the companies that will help science.

It does raise serious questions about whether or not there will be limitations on what types of science can be done. Will they have some line in the sand and say they won't launch satellites that do "X", like maybe monitor climate change.

I think maybe rooting for them to fail is a bit much, but I am sure as hell hoping that someone else can catch up. But in the mean time I will celebrate these achievements cautiously. Recognizing the amazing work that the engineers at SpaceX have put into this, because they do deserve a lot of credit for that.

If I am reading this right I assume this is only if you have onedrive enabled?

If that is the case, I think it makes some sense if you are already setup to use that to default to saving there since it makes it easier to find your files on other devices and they be safe. Theoretically if you have it setup you already agree to the risks of storing data in the cloud.

however... The real problem to me is that onedrive is enabled by default and that they are now requiring you to login with a microsoft account to use Windows. If both of those were not the case this makes complete sense.

But until they stop enabling one drive by default and making it a pain in the ass to disable this is bad.

They also end it with trying to sell their service around AI which further devalues it, and even trying to give it a name like "AppleStorm".

I think some of the points are valid, but I think the over emphasis on Siri vs Private Cloud is massively overblown. That to me is just the nature of a transition like this and eventually more if Siri will likely fall under "Apple Intelligence" since it makes sense that they would have a single platform on the backend.

Then there is this header:

> "End-to-End Encryption? I’m Not Sure"

Well.. it is still end to end encrypted. Nothing about using Siri to dictate it changes that since you know... your on one of the ends. It is like saying that me taking a screenshot of the conversation somehow broke E2E.

That isn't to say that the concern here is not valid, but there are so many examples of things being twisted and manipulated to get you to use their product that I have a hard time really understanding what is an issue and what isn't.

Like ok you made an app using SiriKit using Apple's recommended settings (which may be recommended for a reason). But do you have the ability to have them not go to apple's servers if you configure it a certain way... it seems the author just ended with "Well it happens when I made this app" and never looked further.

> you don't really need to be 100% sure of it being truth for a vast majority of cases.

Except that these tools are being positioned as a source of reliable truth and the companies are incentivized to keep you on their system (google) instead of actually pushing you to the source (unless the source is an ad).

Any disclaimer they try to put is hidden and often lighter/smaller text.

I mean even if that was the intended phrasing that does not really change anything about the reply.

Me latching onto the "appears" does not change anything since even with your interpretation it is wrong 50% of the time and that assumes that the 50% of the time you think it is right you actually know it is right and it is not actually wrong but you never check.