_NoName_

Also Freetube has these features.

Was gonna say, it’s almost definitely a cost-savings measure.

Answer provided by chatGPT /s

I’ll trust that’s true, but even still, logic has never stood in the way of any legislation passing in the US or corporate decision.

The process of collective disarming is the path towards growing past war. And that first step is the collective banning of manufacturing such weapons.

So we’re still in a limbo period with nothing actually on the market.

I know you’re correct, since there are now solid state batteries on the market which outperform liquid-electrolyte LiPo batteries, but just stating “we’re at the tipping point” without dropping any link as evidence makes your claim very unconvincing.

The first news I’ve heard is Yoshino power selling solid state power banks. here’s a video covering them.

I understand some instruction expansions today are used to good effect in x86, but that there are also a sizeable number of instructions that are rarely utilized by compilers and are mostly only continuing to exist for backwards compatibility. That does not really make me think “more instructions are usually better”. It makes me think “CISC ISAs are usually bloated with unused instructions”.

My whole understanding is that while more specific instruction options do provide benefits, the use-cases of these instructions make up a small amount of code and often sacrifice single-cycle completion. The most commonly cited benefit for RISC is that RISC can complete more work (measured in ‘clockcycles per program’ over ‘clockrate’) in a shorter cyclecount, and it’s often argued that it does so at a lower energy cost.

I imagine that RISC-V will introduce other standards in the future (hopefully after it’s finalized the ones already waiting), hopefully with thoroughly thought out instructions that will actually find regular use.

I do see RISC-V proponents running simulated benchmarks showing RISC-V is more effective. I have not seen anything similar from x86 proponents, who usually either make general arguments, or worse , just point at the modern x86 chips that have decades of research, funding, and design behind them.

Overall, I see alot of doubt that ISAs even matter to performance in any significant fashion, and I believe it for performance at the GHz/s level of speed.

Instruction creep maybe? Pretty sure I’ve also seen stuff that seems to show that Torvalds is anti-speculative-execution due to its vulnurabilities, so he could also be referring to that.

Here’s my delivery app for ya: SMS

You text your buddy, they buy the groceries, you pay em for gas & groceries and alittle extra for the trouble, and you have em over for dinner.

None of these exploitive business models RN.

I watched though about half of it, before concluding that this video is only going to be a summary video that won’t answer my questions fully.

Digital ID and Digital signature are absolutely necessary, though depending on how those two are implemented I could still see fraud and vote manipulation being feasible. I was hoping someone with more knowledge about how Estonia is doing its security and verification systems to ensure records aren’t being modified maliciously.

Time to liberate the Russians from themselves.

Maybe get some of that oil. Yaknow, freedom it up.

/s

It’s a good thing the US has equipped every satellite with a concealed carry weapon /s

One thing I commonly hear as an argument against electronic voting is security and ease of vote tampering. Is Estonia solving this issue and, if so, how?

I remember this from a couple years ago. Article from 2021

Monolithic Archive systems like Internet Archive are cool, but we really should be pushing for better localized infrastructure usage for this kind of archiving, IMO.

That’s another potential defederated API to build out. I doubt it will end up developed, since most opensource devs are already busy on other projects.

There is often a very limited market for underperforming hardware, which is how RISC-V chips will be starting out. There is a large amount of accumulated knowledge about, and workflow to accommodate, already established ISAs.

Due to most companies being publicly traded, taking risks is much less common, since a drop in profits could see a massive portion of the company’s funds get pulled, or more likely the CEO being yanked by the board. So they play it safe and choose already established architectures.

I never claimed that the current software didn’t use machine learning

This is not AI.

This is your straight statement, and your only argument was saying it was done before AI was used in it. That’s a poor argument. That’s like arguing that self driving isn’t AI because remote control car piloting existed.

Automated image manipulation vs having 100s of hours in Photoshop. That’s AI vs what came before. Inputting a source file and getting a manipulated file after some amount of time, vs hours of meticulous work trying to get minor details right.

If we want to compare oldschool manipulation vs AI Manipulation, then yes, fakes now are on par with the insane skill of some image doctoring artists - you’re just looking for different things - but it’s at an exponentially lower cost than hiring a professional. Compare AI to itself, though? It’s night and day. Early AI manipulation was atrocious. And modern AI manipulation is only going to get better. That is all due to breakthroughs in AI. imagine what the hell will happen when Sora becomes usable by anyone.

Machine learning has taken an originally hard thing to do and made it cheap and easy. Now, any schmuck can pump out doctored footage in an afternoon. That’s why the AI porn is big- you can pay dirt cheap and give the model photos of any random woman and it’ll make porn of them - and that fact has turned it into a much more viable business model than before, that’s currently creating massive amounts of non consensual porn fakes- exponentially more than before.

You are pulling a no true Scotsman fallacy here. AI has always been a somewhat vague term, and it’s explicitly a buzzword in today’s systems.

This AI front has also been taking the current form for more than a decade, but it wasn’t a public topic until now, because it was terrible up until now.

The relevant things is that AI is automating a normally human-centric practice via extensive training on a data model. All systems I’ve mentioned utilize that machine learning practice at some point in their process.

The statement about the deepfakes is just patently incorrect on your part. It is a trained model which takes an input, and outputs a manipulated output based on its training. That’s enough to meet the criteria. Before it was fairly difficult and almost immediately identifiable as AI manipulated. It’s now popular because it’s gotten good enough to not be immediately noticeable, done fairly easily, and is at the point where it can be mostly automated.