data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f23ae/f23ae0dbc3c54d384754da0746b7df9d687fc207" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cfd2a/cfd2a1dbdaa2a4665edc5da6ca698927da8c09c6" alt=""
You say that like anyone knows how Fahrenheit even works.
You say that like anyone knows how Fahrenheit even works.
In principle, I agree, but I feel like part of that is just AAA vs. indie.
AAA games need to provide lots of lukewarm content, because many more casual players will buy them and expect much bang for their buck + haven't seen this lukewarm content a million times already.
On the other hand, indies will basically only be bought by people more enthusiastic about the hobby. As such, they have to pick out one or two aspects and excel at them, so that it's something new for that crowd.
Hello Games was indie and unknown at the time, so likely only attracted that gaming enthusiast crowd, which would have been more easily bored by the extremely lukewarm content in Starfield.
It took maybe 10 minutes or so for a 256 GB hard drive for me, if I remember correctly.
That was an SSD, though, so yeah, mileage would definitely vary on an HDD.
Hmm, what does that full format do? Write zeros over everything?
Personally, I would run shred
on the root filesystem. It's a tool specifically intended for properly deleting data (overwrites it with random data multiple times).
I came into this comment section wanting to make the same argument, but I guess, you could also be carrying around a USB-C-to-audio-jack adapter in addition to your wired headphones…
Of course, yes. I'm just explaining why there's more political motivation to not be hit by a car than a motorcycle.
They do have a history of such things happening, yes, which is why my comment exists in the first place. Normally, I would assume this to just be the result of regular shitty management practices paired with regular shitty profit motives.
The history makes it look like they might genuinely have a higher motive here, and I'm saying I still don't think so, because it would be far too petty and I don't see them benefitting that much from it.
A motorcycle has a higher chance of killing its rider rather than bystanders, when compared to cars.
Most of it?
Google is blocking popular instances these days, so yeah, you basically need to find an unpopular instance, which usually means it's new and may not live for long, or it will quickly become popular, because it works, which will cause Google to block it.
Yeah, Google started blocking popular instances of Invidious and Piped in May this year: https://github.com/iv-org/invidious/issues/3822
Every so often, it may start working again when those instances get a different IP address, but it usually doesn't last more than a few days…
The thing is, I really don't think, Google would care about Firefox. Firefox is sitting at negligible percentages of usage share. The only real competitor to Chrome is Safari and that's because of iOS.
I guess, they might impact Safari on macOS with this, but someone would have to try this out to actually see, and ultimately, this could still just be a dumb mistake.
Having said that, Google holds a near-monopoly in both video content and web browsers. They have a special duty to not disadvantage competitors and even if this was an honest mistake, I do think, it deserves a slap on the wrist.
I have my repos on Codeberg and one of the 'disadvantages' is that, well, it's a non-profit, so I genuinely don't want to waste their resources.
They ask you to only host open-source repos there, meaning that using it for backups of shitty personal projects, even if I would throw in an open-source license, is just out of the question for me.
And that has weirdly been a blessing in disguise. Like, if it's not useful for humanity to see, do I really care to keep it around forever?
And I've had three projects now where I felt an obligation to push them over the finish line of actually making them a useful open-source project. Which had me iron out some of the usability shortcuts I took, made me learn a good amount of code quality stuff and of course, just feels good to complete.
I mean, at this rate, I'm imagining Microsoft will have hollowed out OpenAI in a few years, but I could see them buying Boston Dynamics, too, yes
If we're talking passwords, that's a no. If we're talking enough personal data that you could use it for spear phishing, identity theft or targetted malvertising, that's a no.
Honestly, no matter how innocous the information you want is, I would be extremely suspicious why you'd want it. And I'm certainly not turning off my ad blocker either.
I guess, the real question is: Could we be using (simplistic) LLMs on a phone for predictive text?
There's some LLMs that can be run offline and which maybe wouldn't use enormous amounts of battery. But I don't know how good the quality of those is…
You're in the No Stupid Questions community. Think about rule 7 in particular.
Yeah, I do also think, it could be built today. But I mainly just don't expect such glasses to have enough mass market appeal that it would actually be available by 2030…
Using such glasses? I realized, I didn't explicitly say that in the comment you replied to…
I feel like most of the layoffs and the flooded market happened in the US. Judging by the name, bleistift is from the EU…