qwytw

6 ms·

1.
by qwytw 3d ago
Find one person who when asked if you they want the useful feature of LG always recording everything they watch on their TVs and selling that data to third parties without giving anything in return would answer yes. I get the voice commands
2.
by qwytw 7d ago
Apple has little incentives to do that, though? They make money from selling hardware and are able to charge a premium (more than they could making by stealing and selling private user information) because they have a reputation. It would b
3.
by qwytw 7d ago
What features is Garmin missing, though? It seems to have most of the stuff you get with an Apple watch and IMHO the Apple watch is objectively exceptionally ugly compared to almost all smartwatches except the more garish "sports"
4.
by qwytw 8d ago
Because it's technically opt-in. And AFAIK the the checkbox is more explicit in Europe and they probably do a bit ore to comply with GDPR. US is a free for all mostly when it comes to abusing consumers through contrived and unfair ToS
5.
by qwytw 8d ago
I'm sue it's not true, it's probably in the single digits (but they might somewhat influence their friends and family)
6.
by qwytw 10d ago
Authoritarian dictatorships will always behave in seemingly irrational ways (from the perspective of sane politicians). Dictators will always put their personal ambition and "career" first before their country's interests. If
7.
by qwytw 17d ago
> EU in general is the last hope for democracy and it is kinda at risk Funny given it's not and was never supposed to be a "democracy" or a federation for that matter. > That disappeard, now EU is fascist Not necessari
8.
by qwytw 17d ago
Until they come up with a procedure to workaround the fact that there is no majority in the EU parliament and push it through anyway (like they did a couple of weeks ago with ChatControl 1.0).
9.
by qwytw 18d ago
> bend the rules of the EU that were established democratically EU might occasionally get some things right but saying it's rules are "established democratically" is a slight stretch. It's a sort of a third degree dem
10.
by qwytw 20d ago
What options do you have? If you're the 10x engineer you'll be a 100x one and do just fine. Otherwise what can you do besides holding on as long as you can or start searching for a new career.
11.
by qwytw 29d ago
> All insurance should be non-profit. Aren't their profits regulated regardless? If all insurance companies became non profit and let's say total prices dropped by 3-5% that still wouldn't change the situation dramatically
12.
by qwytw 29d ago
That number seems hard to believe? Specifically that non government spending would be this low. Presumably "compulsory" includes way more than direct government spending. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/S
13.
by qwytw 1mo ago
That's a moral stance one can take (regardless of the severe cognitive dissonance embedded in it). But what does that have to do with theft? LLM providers don't own the copyrights to the outputs of their models (at least not yet).
14.
by qwytw 1mo ago
>But the real question is: Is it okay to steal from a thief's hoard? How does this relate to your previous paragraphs? LLM outputs are not copyrightable and you didn't break into Anthropic servers to steal the files from there.
15.
by qwytw 1mo ago
If someone acquired a copy of them by breaking into your device and stealing the files sure. If you consciously sent them out to every person who asked for them (even if in their encrypted form) well.. that's a choice you made.
16.
by qwytw 1mo ago
I agree, someone certainly has the right to have an incorrect understanding of that the word "wrong" means. To be fair when someone tries to shift the meaning of words everyone doesn't just have to go with it to appease the l
17.
by qwytw 1mo ago
It's doublespeak. You don't have to perpetuate it.
18.
by qwytw 1mo ago
> over and refusing to acknowledge it. I guess one option would be to vote with your walled and stop paying them? Oh.. wait.. Whatever Oracle is in general this specifically (and the reduced 2 CPU + 12 GB tier ) is still massively more &
19.
by qwytw 1mo ago
There is. Specifically the pricing for open models from third party providers on OpenRouter since inference is a "commodity" at this point. Unless we think that Opus/GPT-5.6 are many times less efficient than GLM 5.2 or Kimi
20.
by qwytw 1mo ago
That's what you should ask the companies spending massive amounts of money on AI though?
21.
by qwytw 1mo ago
There is no evidence they are losing money on inference, though? Also if they are keeping the price low because they want to gain market share and reduce the competitiveness of Chinese models they won't be able to raise prices without
22.
by qwytw 1mo ago
They claimed that OpenAI and Anthropic have positive gross margins. I don't think there are many credible claims saying that's not the case (at least for API usage)?
23.
by qwytw 2mo ago
Cost of labor is based on supply and demand not the value created. If there were more engineers capable of creating those JS frameworks than there was demand for they'd get paid way less and whoever was paying them would pocket the dif
24.
by qwytw 2mo ago
Switzerland was already the second richest country in Europe in 1913 despite not having a colonial empire to exploit, ample raw resources or the best geographic location.
25.
by qwytw 2mo ago
> So? Imagine you build a house and it only increases in value after you sold it? How is this relevant? We are not talking about the author selling the copyright of their work and then someone making more money than they did from it... &
26.
by qwytw 2mo ago
> seemingly moral justifications of an empirically immoral practice How is it empirically immoral? Historically it was one of the best things to have have happened to creative professional in history. Before it writer could make a living
27.
by qwytw 2mo ago
Because the judge ruled that using the books for training was "fair use". The issue was Anthropic downloading and storing pirated content and there is quite a bit of precedent regarding that already...
28.
by qwytw 2mo ago
It would also make it much easier for corporations to exploit authors. They would generally make most of their money early (in the couple of years following when the content is released). Individual authors would be much more affected, it m
29.
by qwytw 2mo ago
Well no, but I'm a human and not a commercial computer program so it's not particularly relevant. I'm would not be making loads of money making those citations either but that's only secondary. > derived works It&#x27
30.
by qwytw 2mo ago
It's up to the congressman to weight all evidence and data available and come to well informed conclusion. If they are incapable or unwilling to do that that's a different issue. > Congress can and does ask companies for their

More ›