I came in here expecting someone to have a legitimate explanation. Lolol at these comments.

If China is bad, and the US is good, then why wouldn’t we want our military to have access to the same (or better) tooling than they have access to.

I’m so morally dilemma’d here

Meta, a US company, allows the US military to use its models. Omg! Let me clutch my pearls.

What’s the moral dilemma? China already took their model and is using it in their military.

Do you guys not want our military to have access to all of the possible tools they can?

You mad about Ford and GM building trucks and vehicles parts for the military too? Are you mad about Microsoft selling windows to the govt?

You just upset that it’s the military?

Where’s this line that’s been drawn where this is a moral dilemma??

Hi! It’s me, the guy you discussed this with the other day! The guy that said Lemmy is full of AI wet blankets.

I am 100% with Linus AND would say the 10% good use cases can be transformative.

Since there isn’t any room for nuance on the Internet, my comment seemed to ruffle feathers. There are definitely some folks out there that act like ALL AI is worthless and LLMs specifically have no value. I provided a list of use cases that I use pretty frequently where it can add value. (Then folks started picking it apart with strawmen).

I gotta say though this wave of AI tech feels different. It reminds me of the early days of the web/computing in the late 90s early 2000s. Where it’s fun, exciting, and people are doing all sorts of weird,quirky shit with it, and it’s not even close to perfect. It breaks a lot and has limitations but their is something there. There is a lot of promise.

Like I said else where, it ain’t replacing humans any time soon, we won’t have AGI for decades, and it’s not solving world hunger. That’s all hype bro bullshit. But there is actual value here.

“do you think your mother’s would still love you if they knew how bad you were at this game?” - Walz

It’s not those people that this sways. They are a “lost cause” in most regards. It’s the people who have hesitations and concerns. The people that have been lifelong Republicans but are feeling jaded or are starting to see through the facade.

It helps sway those people.

Lemmy is hilariously reactionary and fickle. Never found a windmill that couldnt be tilted at.

I’m not sure why that still surprises me considering it’s made up of a ton of people who self selected to leave a site in protest.

The vision “air” that’s Apple’s version of the meta ray bans is going to be their next major product line.

If they get it in ~$500-1000 they’d sell like hotcakes. The reviews on the Meta raybans are surprisingly positive with the biggest gripe being it’s from Meta and people don’t trust it.

Apples big privacy focus and their local first implementation of AI make it really compelling alternative to the Meta offering. Assuming it pairs with iPhones (and their built-in ML cores) it also drives iPhone sales similar to the watch.

Apple could do so much with an ecosystem play with something like that and it would/could also be a “fashion icon” the way white earbuds became synonymous with Apple and the way airpods don’t look “dorky” because everyone has them.

It’s fun to hate apple on Lemmy but I think they’d crush with something like this. An AR glasses setup integrated in their ecosystem with privacy respecting local processing.

I’d seriously consider switching to an iPhone if I got something like that.

I think he’s saying he doesn’t connect the smart TV to the internet. He plugs in his apple TV (and that is connected to the Internet) and has all of the ‘smart’ technology.

Holy shit the negativity between these two posts is disgusting. This world is far from perfect but it’s not a dystopian hell scape and it’s far from a lost cause.

Hop offline, touch grass, talk to your neighbors. Be the change you want to see in the world and all that instead of being the world’s biggest wet blankets.

I’m not sure Clinton helps at this point.

Another way to encourage interoperability is to use the government to hold out a carrot in addition to the stick. Through government procurement laws, governments could require any company providing a product or service to the government to not interfere with interoperability. President Lincoln required standard tooling for bullets and rifles during the Civil War, so there’s a long history of requiring this already. If companies don’t want to play nice, they’ll lose out on some lucrative contracts, “but no one forces a tech company to do business with the federal government.”

That’s actually a very interesting idea. This benefits the govt as much as anyone else too. It reduces switching costs for govt tech.

The speaker killed his own career by not reaching across the aisle. The only reason gaetz and the magats had any say at that point was because the speaker refused to work with anyone but Republicans.

That wing of the party gets neutered with a handful of Dem votes. You get those by working with the other party.

So gaetz didn’t ruin anyone’s career. The former speaker ruined it himself. Gaetz ain’t that “powerful”.

Lol that what my first reaction too. They summed him up perfectly.

Kaola family by Blippi.

It was demanded of me.

I’d never really thought about this, but I know felons can’t vote, but what about if you are in jail awaiting charges? How does that work?

Just getting access to a ballot seems like a challenge. Don’t you have to request an absentee ballot in advance? If you are in jail, you don’t go to the polls obviously.

Did this guy just screw himself out of a vote?

I’ve heard someone call it billionaire brain rot. I think at some point you end up with so much money and not enough people telling you no, that it literally changes your brain.

Seems likely.

This article was all over the god damned map.

You aren’t wrong but…

Can you imagine the spectacle of an ancient senator literally taking a stand for something he/she believes in?

That’d be pretty powerful.

The issue with the filibuster,now, is that it’s too easy. It needs to be hard like the old days.

Ironically, because it’s so easy we actually don’t even see filibusters often anymore. It’s usually the threat of a filibuster that stops legislation in its tracks. If it was harder, where you stood for days, then it might not actually stop legislation. At least it would be brought to force the issue.

You should have to earn it.

I’m sure the geriatric core of our Congress will thrilled to have to stand for hours to prove their points.