No, but I remember once reading an online post where someone didn’t know they were allergic to (certain?) cheese and thought everyone reacted to it the way they did.

The only thing for which I have found that to be true is sushi. Everything else is way easier with a fork.

There are many places other than “disaster response areas” in the world where tap water isn’t safe to drink.

I agree with you when it comes to bottled non-sparkling water at home. But sparkling water doesn’t come from public fountains nor do those exist everywhere you might travel to.

So you’re agreeing with me that this was supported by both parties…?

(I’m actually Austrian, not German; I have however read enough about US politics that I’m fairly confident in my statement above.)

Garuda Linux will not implement any age verification measures, since Garuda Linux’s legal jurisdictions have no laws mandating age verification.

Yes. That’s how it should be, that on the Internet you only have to comply with laws where you or the servers you are hosting things on are based, and all other places can piss off when it comes to enforcing their laws.

And it’s how it mostly used to work, but we now live in this world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrest_and_indictment_of_Pavel_Durov

One of my childhood dreams was to run my own successful web forum. Now that we live in this world where that means countries might prosecute me because my users have been doing things that are illegal somewhere in the world, that dream is officially dead. >:(

The big deal is that it’s on the heels of age verification bullshit that fascists are pushing through with the help of tech bros, so that they can eventually push all of us into a scenario where we have zero privacy.

That’s a bit difficult to argue in a world where the most prominent of such laws was passed in California, where Democrats control the entire legislative process.

I have not looked up the voting record for it, but would suspect that, like most of the worst laws in the US, it was enthusiastically supported by both parties? Am I wrong about that?

you mean like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutraloaf or what

Yes, you did: OpenID.

I remember when I first read about it (late 2000s? not sure when), I thought it was an awesome idea and surely the web of the future would be full of “log in with OpenID” buttons.

Instead it is now full of “log in with Google”, “log in with Facebook”, “log in with Microsoft” buttons.

I hoped that the answer to this would be in the post body, but no, no opportunity for me to learn about something new. 😕

https://xkcd.com/810/ was oddly prophetic

So when the entire style of government and bureaucracy is dissolved you think the country continues?

Yes, normally as long as there is legal continuity, countries retain their identity through changes of systems of government.

For example today’s Germany is generally considered to be the same country as the North German confederation founded in the 19th century.

Likewise the end of communism in Eastern Europe didn’t cause Bulgaria, Poland, or Hungary to cease existing, just change their form of government.

Kids likely don’t frequent forums like Lenny.

“Kids” being people of what age? Because I started regularly posting to web forums at the age of 10 and if Lemmy had existed then, I might very well have joined it.

Either we quickly find a way to undo the damage government regulation has done to it in the last ~10 years, or we lose all the good it could do for society forever because the coming generations won’t know what they’re missing. :(

Neither in Judaism nor Christianity are the Ten Commandments the only religious rules that exist.

Part of it is an instinct. All mammals, including humans, have evolved to be at least somewhat competent at raising offspring because those that weren’t had an obvious evolutionary disadvantage. Think of how other animals do it; if they can do that, why wouldn’t you?

But it’s a skill like any other, you can read books or watch videos or attend courses about it, or you can ask people who’ve successfully done it before (such as your parents).

I tried them when I was in the Netherlands (at more than ten years older than you are) and they made me feel bad and vomit most times I tried. I have no intention of trying them again, but YMMV.

Smoking weed meanwhile didn’t cause any such symptoms. Would recommend doing that instead.

Not all of it does? The medicine I take most often is ibuprofen pills (when I get headaches), which tastes completely neutral, neither good nor bad.

Confusing because there is a DB client called SQuirreL.

But also relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1989/

whoever employs LLM

incumbent upon the handler to assume liabillity

I agree. If you make any kind of real-world decision based on the output of AI, you should be liable for it as if you’d made that decision yourself.

But I remember reading some news stories about cases where people (often minors) chatted with chatbots and managed to get those chatbots into states where the chatbots encouraged that the users harm themselves (in some cases even commit suicide?). As tragic as that is, I don’t see how it’s morally right to hold the AI companies responsible for that unless it can be shown they did this on purpose. All the AI did in such cases was what it was advertised and understood to do: generate plausible-sounding text based on user input. Those are the cases I’m talking about.

I don’t, not in general.

There are good and bad uses of AI. For example I used AI to generate my profile picture here on Lemmy (would you have noticed?). In general the creation of art is one of the best uses of AI I can think of; it doesn’t have serious consequences if it goes wrong, and it can easily be reviewed by a human whether it looks as it should.

But using AI to make actually meaningful business decisions without any human review at all? Using AI for customer service? Any company that does that deserves VERY negative consequences.

I don’t agree with talking points like “AI companies should be required to pay copyright holders of their training data” or “AI is bad because of the environmental impact” or “AI is bad because of RAM prices” or “AI companies should be legally responsible for any mistakes the AI makes (such as libel or encouraging users’ suicide)” or such things; I think all of these are nonsense.

I believe in general that AI gets too much attention in the media. It’s really not that impactful.