43

Other differentiated opinions wanted:

A friend showed me this and treats it like a prophecy. I'm rather skeptical. To me seems like somebody tries to fuel the AI hype with this text or is completely drunk with AI. It also fuels the China-US who-is-better-fight and the authors thoughts seem to circle too much around the US president, IMO.

But I don't understand much of this machine-learning stuff. So maybe it's me being ignorant. Still, to me reads like science fiction. How about you?

50
submitted 9 months ago by teri@discuss.tchncs.de to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

Need a quick solution for a video call right now? A shared document? A poll? URL shortener? ... This website takes you to a (random) open-source service.

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 10 months ago

If everybody would as a consequence use Librewolf, Mozilla would be forced to change minds.

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 40 points 10 months ago

Windows also used to show me the ugly face of Trump in the start menu even if I didn't ask for it. That was more than 4 years ago. Recently was accidentally hovering over some 'copilot' button in Edge of a friend. And again - pop-up with Trump. So yes: fuck Windows, fuck Microsoft

4
submitted 10 months ago by teri@discuss.tchncs.de to c/politics@lemmy.world

"[...] what we’re witnessing now is the systematic dismantling of this entire architecture of peace—not through external defeat, but through internal surrender"

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 60 points 10 months ago

We need such statements now more than ever. Thank you Codeberg <3

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 10 months ago

Green flags:

  • copyleft license (GPL or better AGPL) + they accept contributions without contributor license agreement
  • code written by many people who personally own the copyright
  • active community

Yellow flags:

  • permissive license
  • business model which can't be really be sustainable with a shit-free product

Red flags:

  • VC funding (implies enshittification in future because of profit maximization)
  • proprietary license
  • project does not take contribution from the outside or asks to transfer copyright or sign some document (CLA)
1
submitted 10 months ago by teri@discuss.tchncs.de to c/politics@lemmy.world
[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 10 months ago

Google managed to create a very clean image of themselves in most heads, but looking closer it is an ugly profit maximization machine. It cares about shareholders. If it cares about you, then probably for spying on you and learn how to manipulate you and others better. I hope people start realizing finally.

And let's state it clear: Google could have a voice. They could object to the Musk-Thiel-Trumpian destruction machine. They could be there for the world. But they're not. Not at all. They serve the money. And if it pays off, then they are willing to ruin peoples lives.

Google is on the wrong side of history.

57
submitted 10 months ago by teri@discuss.tchncs.de to c/politics@lemmy.world

[...] By the time most Americans understand what's happening, the "reboot" – the destruction of government – may already be complete.

73
submitted 1 year ago by teri@discuss.tchncs.de to c/foss@beehaw.org
[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 54 points 2 years ago

gitlab.com is a for profit service/company. They have an open-source community edition of Gitlab which you can run on your own server. Codeberg is a non-profit association running the open-source software "forgejo" for you. At Codeberg you can become a member and then you can vote for important decisions and make proposals. People also care about ethics there. Nobody cares about profit. Codeberg runs on donations from members. I think some people feel more respected at Codeberg because the governing body of Codeberg is a subset of its users. If Gitlab cares about you, then probably because a bad user experience would be bad for business.

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 2 years ago

It serves a purpose. But an evil one: stopping journalists from reporting on US war crimes

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 2 years ago

The rape story was part of a mud campaign. It was made up and the world fell for it. What happens here is: A journalist publishes proofs of US war crimes. And the war criminals (US gov) come after him because of exactly that. Their message is clear: who ever reports on our crimes will be destroyed. This is a fight against press freedom and against the democratic freedom as we think to know it.

https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 31 points 2 years ago

It is completely creepy. Think about who is behind Open AI. That's a mixture of Elon Musk, Peter Thiel (Palantir), Microsoft and others. A right-wing, anti democratic, anti-human and purely profit oriented group. The name "Tools for Humanity" is complete sarcasm. What they do with Worldcoin smells like a modern attempt of colonization. Collecting biometry, subverting critical infrastructure (financial systems), making fake promises, blinding poor people with shiny metal balls and a little bit of money in some cases.

This can be stopped though! The Kenyan government apparently banned the project - for good.

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Did you consider that it might be good for humanity to lock our billionaires into bunkers? We should lock them in in order for us to survive.

The difference is marginal: just a matter on which side you place the door handles.

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 36 points 2 years ago

$25 million? That's ridiculously cheap.

[-] teri@discuss.tchncs.de 28 points 2 years ago

Spontaneous idea of how to use copyright law for keeping Meta out of the Fediverse (more for fun):

Introduction: Parts of the Fediverse, including Mastodon, are software licensed under the APGL license. This license is a great choice because it forces the ones running the software to grant users access to the source code. GPL for example would allow to run proprietary services based on GPL code. The AGPL does not. Companies like Meta and Google will likely not use AGPL code because it might force them to also publish their proprietary systems behind the scenes. However, this does not help much for keeping the Fediverse save. They simply implement their own software which will not be open source.

Therefore we may need another approach. Defederating is the simplest and in my opinion currently the best. It's easy and keeps people in control.

However, there could be some 'automatic' approach using copyright law. It's a hack which allows to use existing law to regulate the way instances can federate.:

  • instances would Federate only if the other side can provide a certain piece of information called X
  • X is protected by copyright law, therefore by default, instances are not allowed to provide X
  • However, X is released under a license which for permits to copy and distribute X under certain conditions
  • The conditions allow to tune who can legally federate
  • Conditions could be
    • The server software must be AGPL licensed
    • The instance must not be owned by a company with a certain amount of annual revenue

Open question is, who owns the copyright of X?

view more: next ›

teri

joined 2 years ago