What the ever-loving fuck. Legalized virus distribution on your LAN, planned, developed, and deployed by peripheral manufacturers? I'm so glad that I know better than to use Windows anywhere, and know better than to buy "modern" computing hardware - as with automobiles the somewhat older stuff is perfectly adequate and comes without all these kinds of infosec risks.
The local retail computer "recycling" center has shelf after shelf after shelf of crufty old monitors, towers, servers, laptops and other components to choose from. Sure all those have certain risks as well (but probably not "smart" ones) but it's starting to feel like it's time to go stock up as the computing hardware scene gets more dystopian every day.
Yep, tried a different computer with a different JS blocking configuration and that's getting me around the paywall. For those w/o JS blocking, disabling JS might work too. Tnx.
"I got pull in this town". That's rich. That would indeed be a great quote to put on his prison garb. The other inmates deserve to know about his pull.
five-year cabin ownership starts at $59,999. Full ownership prices start at $99,999. There are various other occupancy plans. Owners also pay monthly fees — which in 2025 worked out as $2,000 per person per month for double occupancy, and $3,000 for single occupancy.
And while the prices of a Villa Vie’s cabin aren’t cheap, they remain comparatively accessible in contrast to The World, the only other residential cruise ship experience currently at sea, which caters to a more upscale market with a current starting price of $3.5 million.
I hate paywalls more than almost anything, but I don't see one here.
It's possible that all my adblocking defenses are silently neutralizing the paywall if it exists.
I don't think I've ever even seen an e-ink reader. In the past year I thought I'd give more e-content a try, one reason being that my public library has loads of such content available - not just books but also magazines (like Harpers say) that I used to pay good money to subscribe to. I bought a used, not-too-old tablet with an 11" screen and thought I'd be good to go. But ... it weighs a lot somehow and feels awkward in hand because of that, the screen while fine otherwise (it's a pretty nice device IMO) is not-quite-sharp-enough it feels, and I find myself constantly zooming to help with that, but doing so messes up layouts and then I find myself scrolling not only up/down but also side-to-side, a real PITA. And apart from all that, being an Android device, there are also all kinds of apps right there begging for attention while I'm trying to read. Not a good experience even if some of it is a lack of self-control on my part.
I'll have to research the devices. I would be concerned about the content ownership issue - I want to buy my books and have them under my complete control whether on-device or on-bookshelf (not counting any content that I don't feel the need to own, like public library content). I don't want to give Amazon a single cent either for hardware or for content because Amazon is an evil company. And of course I don't want to pay a ton of $ on hardware either, or find that the content is much too pricey - I almost always buy books used but will usually pay hardcover prices when I do.
Thanks for your perspective. I now have another rabbit hole to dive down.
Interfering with operation ... hmm... you've no doubt seen (at least if you're on FB) the photo of the guy sitting outdoors on a chair next to a Flock device, and blocking its camera using a sign (or something, can't tell) that's mounted on a pole at FlockCam height. He's not touching the Flock gear but he's presumably interfering with its photo/video taking ability in a mostly passive way. Vandalism? Or does vandalism actually involve making physical contact with the vandalized object? I could imagine him arguing that he was just holding a sign up for the world to read and didn't intend to interfere with the FlockCam. Still vandalism? Or could people put up objects (signs, flags, stuffed animals, Diaper Baby effigies) on poles very close to FlockCams (but not touching them) that happened to prevent those cams from doing visual surveillance, all without being vandals?
Is it vandalism if one does something that stops an X from working temporarily even if one doesn't damage the X at all? It's an interesting question, I'd always thought vandalism = causing damage to a thing.
I like to buy print books because I hate reading on tiny screens. There's also something about reading from a real book that feels right, the heft of it, the cover art, the occasional errors, and if used, the scars that can indicate that someone like you also cared about reading it once. It's an experience nothing like reading a stream of bits. It's an experience that's probably a lot like what vinyl LP fans get from listening to their analog albums vs listening to streamed music.
If these AI companies destroy books in bulk then we'll have fewer and fewer physical books to read and their prices will go up. They've been hoovering-up RAM for their datacenter computers for years and prices for RAM have been crazy high as a result, hobbling system-builders and driving up prices for consumer electronics across the board. Rare books are already expensive, and if more books become rare just because AI companies are destroying books, then all books will eventually become prohibitively expensive. We'll then be marketed AI-generated text that we'll be assured is "just as good" as those "old" books (we'll also be told that "old" is undesirable and that AI-generated text is better because it's "new" and because AI has improved the originals). Eventually the old books will disappear in any form and we'll only have AI books.
It should go without saying that the AI texts will be polluted with pro-AI propaganda and with propaganda, overt or covert, promoting the views and best interests of the AI's corporate owners. Every text will have within it somewhere a voice speaking for the benefit of the Sam Altmans of the world.
Right, here it is Monday and this Lemmy posting is the first I've heard of the incident. In civilized times, this would have been front-page news from coast to coast. Now, a mass shooting elicits just a shrug of the shoulders, a "oh yeah, again, well whatever" response, and the "media", such as it is, ignores it.
What the ever-loving fuck. Legalized virus distribution on your LAN, planned, developed, and deployed by peripheral manufacturers? I'm so glad that I know better than to use Windows anywhere, and know better than to buy "modern" computing hardware - as with automobiles the somewhat older stuff is perfectly adequate and comes without all these kinds of infosec risks.
The local retail computer "recycling" center has shelf after shelf after shelf of crufty old monitors, towers, servers, laptops and other components to choose from. Sure all those have certain risks as well (but probably not "smart" ones) but it's starting to feel like it's time to go stock up as the computing hardware scene gets more dystopian every day.
Yep, tried a different computer with a different JS blocking configuration and that's getting me around the paywall. For those w/o JS blocking, disabling JS might work too. Tnx.
"I got pull in this town". That's rich. That would indeed be a great quote to put on his prison garb. The other inmates deserve to know about his pull.
Paywalled.
I hate paywalls more than almost anything, but I don't see one here. It's possible that all my adblocking defenses are silently neutralizing the paywall if it exists.
Non-white=criminal/traitor/terrorist, isn't that the Algorithm? So easy even a MAGA can understand it.
Which one?
I don't think I've ever even seen an e-ink reader. In the past year I thought I'd give more e-content a try, one reason being that my public library has loads of such content available - not just books but also magazines (like Harpers say) that I used to pay good money to subscribe to. I bought a used, not-too-old tablet with an 11" screen and thought I'd be good to go. But ... it weighs a lot somehow and feels awkward in hand because of that, the screen while fine otherwise (it's a pretty nice device IMO) is not-quite-sharp-enough it feels, and I find myself constantly zooming to help with that, but doing so messes up layouts and then I find myself scrolling not only up/down but also side-to-side, a real PITA. And apart from all that, being an Android device, there are also all kinds of apps right there begging for attention while I'm trying to read. Not a good experience even if some of it is a lack of self-control on my part.
I'll have to research the devices. I would be concerned about the content ownership issue - I want to buy my books and have them under my complete control whether on-device or on-bookshelf (not counting any content that I don't feel the need to own, like public library content). I don't want to give Amazon a single cent either for hardware or for content because Amazon is an evil company. And of course I don't want to pay a ton of $ on hardware either, or find that the content is much too pricey - I almost always buy books used but will usually pay hardcover prices when I do.
Thanks for your perspective. I now have another rabbit hole to dive down.
Interfering with operation ... hmm... you've no doubt seen (at least if you're on FB) the photo of the guy sitting outdoors on a chair next to a Flock device, and blocking its camera using a sign (or something, can't tell) that's mounted on a pole at FlockCam height. He's not touching the Flock gear but he's presumably interfering with its photo/video taking ability in a mostly passive way. Vandalism? Or does vandalism actually involve making physical contact with the vandalized object? I could imagine him arguing that he was just holding a sign up for the world to read and didn't intend to interfere with the FlockCam. Still vandalism? Or could people put up objects (signs, flags, stuffed animals, Diaper Baby effigies) on poles very close to FlockCams (but not touching them) that happened to prevent those cams from doing visual surveillance, all without being vandals?
Is it vandalism if one does something that stops an X from working temporarily even if one doesn't damage the X at all? It's an interesting question, I'd always thought vandalism = causing damage to a thing.
I agree, but it doesn't seem to be paywalled. I was able to read the whole article on 404media.co with no problem.
The "administration's priorities" = those of the Junior Anti-Sex League.
I like to buy print books because I hate reading on tiny screens. There's also something about reading from a real book that feels right, the heft of it, the cover art, the occasional errors, and if used, the scars that can indicate that someone like you also cared about reading it once. It's an experience nothing like reading a stream of bits. It's an experience that's probably a lot like what vinyl LP fans get from listening to their analog albums vs listening to streamed music.
If these AI companies destroy books in bulk then we'll have fewer and fewer physical books to read and their prices will go up. They've been hoovering-up RAM for their datacenter computers for years and prices for RAM have been crazy high as a result, hobbling system-builders and driving up prices for consumer electronics across the board. Rare books are already expensive, and if more books become rare just because AI companies are destroying books, then all books will eventually become prohibitively expensive. We'll then be marketed AI-generated text that we'll be assured is "just as good" as those "old" books (we'll also be told that "old" is undesirable and that AI-generated text is better because it's "new" and because AI has improved the originals). Eventually the old books will disappear in any form and we'll only have AI books.
It should go without saying that the AI texts will be polluted with pro-AI propaganda and with propaganda, overt or covert, promoting the views and best interests of the AI's corporate owners. Every text will have within it somewhere a voice speaking for the benefit of the Sam Altmans of the world.
Right, here it is Monday and this Lemmy posting is the first I've heard of the incident. In civilized times, this would have been front-page news from coast to coast. Now, a mass shooting elicits just a shrug of the shoulders, a "oh yeah, again, well whatever" response, and the "media", such as it is, ignores it.
"A shooter recklessly began shooting in a crowded area"
Recklessly? Is there some other way to shoot in a crowded area? A "responsible" way?
Meta lies, you can see it in their eyes ...
*veil
Blessed are they who employ good grammar and spelling.
Bible stories in the classroom sounds great, if teachers can use A/V aids like this:
The Goon Bible Project - Book of Job
Kids will love it.