Skip Navigation

User banner
mfed1122 @ mfed1122 @discuss.tchncs.de
Posts
1
Comments
129
Joined
5 mo. ago

  • YouTube is now flagging accounts on Premium family plans that aren't in the same household

    Jump

  • I had recently heard about that service for the first time and I do think it's a good step forward. But like you said, being properly walled off is a big miss w.r.t the ideal vision of Internet culture. I think that's why I like the idea of server bill crowdfunding (same model that Lemmy instances use basically). Some people need to step up and pay for it, and once a threshold is reached, the content is publicly available for all. But it's not like the people who pay are martyrs, since of course if nobody pays then the thing is lost entirely.

    For a video hosting service, I feel like paywalling features is a good compromise, too. Once the bills are covered, everyone gets to enjoy ad-free, unsponsored videos... something along those lines would be preferable, at least to me since I feel like the openness of the internet is a great component to what makes it such a special place. Not that I mind private internet spaces either. I think both are important. So I think Nebula has a place in my personal utopian internet landscape too lol

  • YouTube is now flagging accounts on Premium family plans that aren't in the same household

    Jump

  • Yeah no denying YouTube is particularly hard to replace, hence why there's been nary a competitor even after all this time. I think paying for server upkeep could be a model that ekes out a victory...it would be drastically cheaper to users, and would come without ads or any of that other annoying junk. Ultimately someone needs to pay the bills, so it's not like I even blame YouTube for making you choose between ads or subscriptions. It's just when they push it further than that, always further, forever further and further...

  • Doubting Your Favorite Web Search Engine

    Jump

  • Took me awhile to get back to this, but yeah I agree that it seems at least conceptually solid. The big barrier is that, like jarfil mentioned, you'd need at least 200 million sites indexed, so you'd need a good amount of users for it to work. And the users would need to consent to running some software that basically logs all the pages they visit. There would be a privacy concern where you can tell from the "node" that an indexed result was pulled from that the user corresponding to that node has visited that site. This could maybe be fixed by each user also downloading indexed site data from others aside from what they personally use, thus mixing in their own activity with others indistinguishably? Probably clever vulnerabilities in that too though.

    Structurally it seems a lot like DNS. If only DNS servers were fine storing embeddings of site content and making those queryable, it would seemingly accomplish the same idea, aside from it being in the hands of DNS operators. Of course, that massively multiplies the amount of data these servers need to an impossible degree.

    I still need to read up on what primitive indexing really looks like and how much space it takes to store per site.

  • YouTube is now flagging accounts on Premium family plans that aren't in the same household

    Jump

  • I really wanted to like and use Peertube more, but it's so devoid of any content aside from political podcasts, as far as I can tell. I can't tell if the search function is bad, or I'm using it wrong, or there really is just that little content. Any recommendations for Peertube content?

  • YouTube is now flagging accounts on Premium family plans that aren't in the same household

    Jump

  • I really think corporations are starting to overplay their hands here. People don't need Prime as much as Amazon thinks they do, people don't need YouTube as much as Google thinks they do, and so on. Especially in the case of YT, yeah, turns out it's easy to compete when your service is free. But once it gets freemium enough, things like Peertube start to take a place on the optimal frontier. Right now Peertube only competes with YouTube if you're sensitive to the dimension of a service being centralized or not, most people don't give a shit about that. But the dimension of cost and ads? Enshittify YouTube too much and suddenly Peertube has its place for anyone who cares about money or time (i.e everyone).

    And Prime? Don't think people won't start just going to stores again, or buying directly from producers. At least if I go to an actual website to buy my stuff I don't need to worry about getting ripped off by some drop-ship fake brand garbage.

    People love their little conveniences and will try to hang on to them, sure...but I think this could really start to backfire if they push it much further.

  • Doubting Your Favorite Web Search Engine

    Jump

  • Hrrmm. Webrings it is. But also, the search engine problem seems like one calling out for a creative solution. I'll try to look into it some more I guess. Maybe there's a way that you could distribute which peer indexes which sites. I would even be fine sharing some local processing power when I browse to run a local page ranking that then gets shared with peers...maybe it could be done in a way where attributes of the page are measured by prevalence and then the relative positive or negative weighting of those attributes could be adjusted per-user.

    Hope it's not annoying for me to spitball ideas in random Lemmy comments.

  • Doubting Your Favorite Web Search Engine

    Jump

  • Never heard of Kagi before, article convinced me I don't wanna use it anyways...lol.

    Wasn't the original Google search algorithm published in a research paper? Maybe someone with more domain knowledge than I could help me understand this: is there any obstacle to starting a search engine today that just works like that? No AI, no login, no crazy business...just something nice and rudimentary. I do understand all the ways that system could be gamed, but given Google/Bing etc.'s dominance, I feel like a smaller search engine doesn't really need to worry about people trying to game it's algorithm.

  • Good point

    Jump

  • Hah, I should have known better than to pull an example from something I've only played a little of. But you're right, from the bug's perspective, the humans are like the bugs. And indeed, this analogy hits on many of the problems with what I'm saying.

  • "Are we the baddies?"

    Jump

  • What I always find most striking about this picture is the insane, obvious, over-the-top evilness of it. But then I remember that at the time there was no prior insane evilness for that kind of iconography to be associated with. It's a design language, a trend, and just like anything else it can be popular or unpopular depending on the context. One decade baggy pants look cool, then they look stupid, then they look cool again, and so on. At the time that that first went on display, it probably didn't seem so obviously evil.

    For a long time I thought the most valuable lesson that picture can teach is that evil can always wear a new disguise, and a mere visual similarity is not enough to identify it. You have to be able to look behind the disguise and see what is really there.

    But it seems that this generation of evil is not so creative.

  • Good point

    Jump

  • Yeah, that's a good point about Christmas. I guess the reality of whether something is religious or not really just depends on the way that it's practiced culturally. I feel like the majority of marriages still involve altars and vows and all of the Christian trappings, so I think that they have a lot more of their original Christianity retained than Christmas does... Especially since the most iconic elements of Christmas were pilfered from earlier religions (which probably contributes to why Christians don't want to complain about it that much).

    It really is as simple as just having a clear distinction between secular and religious marriage like you said. I think that if someone is licensed to perform a legal marriage, they should not be able to turn down a customer on account of them being gay. But I do agree that a religious marriage should be able to turn down gay people. The problem of course, is that the boundaries between the two are so muddied - and it's only the Christians that are doing the muddying. I used to be more of the " let them do their own thing" type of atheist, but I think the real key thing to watch out for there is that a core tenet of most religions involves spreading itself to others whether they like it or not. They believe they have a moral imperative authority over your private behavior. It kind of reminds me of the bugs in Factorio if you've ever played that. Like, at first it seems fine for me to just let them chill and breed their little hive off in the corner of the map, since we both leave each other alone. But the problem is that the intrinsic nature of those bugs is that they'll eventually come and fuck up my factory - they can't and won't leave me alone. When it comes to Christianity at least, I've started to see it more like this:

    If they're leaving me alone right now, it's just because they're incubating power to force upon me later.

  • Good point

    Jump

  • First of all. Thank you so much for refusing to fight against strawman arguments and putting forward what people actually believe. It's much more productive, and interesting to talk about. I hate religion and I hate their stupid arguments, but I wish that criticisms would focus on the stupid arguments they actually make, instead of stupid arguments they don't make.

    On the marriage front, and I know it's not your beliefs I'm rebutting here, that argument has always especially bothered me. Because it's like. Yes, actually, I do think gay marriage is nonsensical. Marriage is indeed a religious concept, and all of the religions that promote it condemn homosexuality. I hate marriage in general and wish nobody would get married. Yet it still happens, why? Why do gay people even care about being married then?

    Primarily, it's because the Christians forced their religious construct to become so intertwined with legal and financial benefits that are otherwise unobtainable, that you put yourself at an objective disadvantage as a couple, economically, medically, legally, if you do not get married. The problem is that once marriage passed from the religious conceptual realm where it gestated, and into the political sphere, it should have become a separate, secular concept under the idea of separation of church and state. But of course the Christians can't accept that kind of compromise either. They want to have it all, all, all. So if Christians didn't want gay people to want to get married, then they shouldn't have enshrined their religious concept unfairly above others in the governmental system. Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, motherfuckers.

  • Breaking The Creepy AI in Police Cameras

    Jump

  • Yooooooo what he's the Flashbulb!? Crazy lol. I've loved his music for years now. Did not at all realize it was the same guy. Taste goes with taste I suppose

  • Breaking The Creepy AI in Police Cameras

    Jump

  • Woah, this guy is great. I wish it were possible for me to do something like this full time, but I lack the wide skills he's got. I wonder how long it takes to get to that level? And I wonder if there's any organizations that might sort of scratch this itch? Been fantasizing about working for the IFF or something like that.

    Really really love how he ends the video by insulting and criticizing the companies that asked him to be sponsored by them. Insane power move

  • Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year

    Jump

  • I was wondering this awhile ago too. There are ways but it's pretty hardcore stuff from what I can tell. It's basically a lost cause at that point. Some solutions involve using $30,000+ laser machines to manipulate the hardware physically and cause glitches in the locking. But even then the devices have self-destruct mechanisms to detect tampering. Not like the phone explodes, but they self-destruct the cryptographic keys needed to unlock the bootloader, and then you're stuck trying to brute force in by guessing keys, which most likely will take literally a million years.

  • Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year

    Jump

  • At this point I'm thinking of just carrying around a small touchscreen laptop

  • Poor guy!

    Jump

  • Nah they're just Nazis and they're fucking around. I mean like yeah they're really stupid but they know what they're saying here. He says gay marriage is cool except that then you have to accept transgender people too (which isn't even necessarily connected to gay marriage anyways) - but the implied conclusion is that because you shouldn't accept transgender people, then you have no choice but to reject gay marriage as well. So he's talking like he's cool with gay marriage, but in reality he isn't. When he says it's his heritage, he's trying to use the language of the left against them - saying that because this is his cultural heritage we have to accept it. He's just not saying he's a Nazi outright because he doesn't need to, that's what the SS pin is for. The strategy of Neo-Nazis is to create confusion and ambiguity around who is and isn't a Nazi, to disorient their enemy. Same as every other bad thing we see today. It's not about not having concentration camps, it's not about keeping them secret, it's about publicizing it and wrapping the public up in a haze of sophistry and definitional confusion about "what is a concentration camp, really?" Dog-whistling used to be done to operate in secret, now it is done to create plausible deniability and confusion that makes it difficult for others to organize against them.

  • Poor guy!

    Jump

  • The biggest thing to understand here is that these three guys are just the ones we hear about. For every three people who come out and say this stuff, (the quote in the screenshot is actually the least crazy of all the things they say) there are more that are keeping it secret. And for every person keeping their Nazism secret, there are tens more that aren't quite Nazis, but are still very racist and bigoted. As a society we must absolutely cease tolerating these people. Some people have argued it's better to have them be unafraid to express their views so that then we at least know who they are. I wonder that too sometimes, but overall, I think I'd rather they be shamed into shutting up and keeping it to themselves.

  • Poor guy!

    Jump

  • Bro is fed up with being cis-gendered 🤨

  • Trump is building ‘one interface to rule them all.’ It’s terrifying.

    Jump

  • Oh God yes a still sentient and thinking brain just completely devoid of sensory input for eternity until he goes mad. Ironic fates ftw

  • Lemmy @lemmy.ml
    mfed1122 @discuss.tchncs.de

    Possible enhancement? Swappable hide/show "profiles"