Mastodon Feed: Posts

Boosted by soatok@furry.engineer ("Soatok Dreamseeker"):
Daojoan ("JA Westenberg") wrote:

You can care about nutrition and still eat cake at a birthday party.

You can be disciplined and still be fun.

Don’t confuse self-improvement with self-surveillance.

Don’t confuse certainty with wisdom.

And don’t confuse being a dick with courage.

https://www.joanwestenberg.com/p/just-be-normal-about-st

Boosted by soatok@furry.engineer ("Soatok Dreamseeker"):
mhoye@cosocial.ca wrote:

"Your use case is, there's a fourteen year old in an emergency room at 3 AM. English is their second or maybe fourth language. They have a battered school Chromebook or a hand-me-down Android device that was the cheapest thing on the market six years ago or a PS Vita their parents don't even realize has a web browser, and they're trying to educate themselves in the middle of the single most terrifying night they've ever experienced. Your site needs to work for that person at that moment."

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

RE: https://infosec.exchange/@david%5Fchisnall/116725663205605698

baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason") wrote:

I can't tell you how frustrating it is to warn about a risk when the fuck-around-to-finding-out time gap is on the order of 3-6 years.

Just year after year of watching people kick explosives around going all "I don't know what you were talking around, this thing doesn't explode".

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

a cramped area full of computers known as 'the hellhole'

jsonstein@masto.deoan.org ("Jeff Sonstein") wrote:

‘a synchronized, multilayered campaign that covers the close-in “kill zone,” the midrange resupply zone in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine, and the territory far inside Russia where Ukraine has hit sites producing crucial weapon technology.’

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/10/world/europe/ukraine-midrange-logistics-strikes.html?unlocked%5Farticle%5Fcode=1.pFA.7t4I.nLzqlWABVmyw&smid=nytcore-ios-share

Boosted by jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)"):
TheOneDoc@tech.lgbt ("VoidZeroOne :tranarchy_a_genderqueer: :v_trans: :v_pan:") wrote:

@jonny Looks fine to me. Not a lawyer. However my lawyer friend says the judgement looks air tight and there's a snowball in hell chance that another court will disregard it.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

For the highest availability, TigerBeetle should be deployed as a cluster of six replicas across three different cloud providers (two replicas per provider).

blinks

and how many of your clients are actually prepared to pay for that?

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

okay so i am reading the page where they allege to describe how they achieve performance and i have questions.

yes, batching is very good. i can't help but notice that it is carefully designed to only deal with heavily batchable data. it feels like cheating but okay fine, whatever, you pick your domain and banks have lots of money.

but the single core... i assume they mean single writer. they must mean single writer, surely? my readers are effectively synchronisation free after some lightweight startup dance. to me this is like half of the point of having immutable data blocks and a single writer.

and it would be remiss of me not to point out that to actually handover the data properly, the client is required to supply a unique correlation key (indeed this is built into their client libraries!), so you're going to need some way to persist that id in your real database if you're going to correctly recover from it. so how can you ever unlock the performance they allege? why don't you just do it all in your proper database at that point?

i guess it only works if you go big on the microservices with own database thing?

https://docs.tigerbeetle.com/concepts/performance/

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

companies tend not to sell products with infinite liability that can be trivially baited by anyone in a few, free tries.

Boosted by kornel ("Kornel"):
hywan@floss.social ("Ivan Enderlin 🦀") wrote:

Let's Encrypt bans certificate usage in any US sanctioned territory, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48453275.

Here we are. Let’s Encrypt is not trustable anymore. Any alternatives?

Feeling sad.

#LetsEncrypt #tls #ssl #https

Boosted by kornel ("Kornel"):
magicalgirlsabrina ("Sabrina Ryan") wrote:

"the body keeps the score" okay so i thought we were playing for fun and now i'm upset

Gargron ("Eugen Rochko") wrote:

What would you like me to record a #Mastodon tutorial about next? (I kindly request that you check the playlist of tutorials I already made before suggesting something)

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmw3ZEE678QVxiLj4g5IMr3afgD2mvon1

baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason") wrote:

Apparently, this isn't because of "AI" or privacy regulations but because German courts decided that third party liability shields don't apply to "AI" summaries published by Google itself

This should not come as a surprise, I and others warned about this

I wrote this (see image) in The Intelligence Illusion back in 2023 (https://illusion.baldurbjarnason.com/)

"Landmark German ruling declares Google's AI Overviews are Google's own words and makes it liable for false answers"

https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

This is like real bad for AI.

Again, fresh in-post label for I am not a lawyer and I am reading this through shockingly bad PDF machine translation.

The judge is explicitly cutting down most of the legal defenses they use. They make a sharp cut between search and AI, saying search is indispensable, but AI is not, and defendants have not proven how being held liable for their output would compromise the ability to run a normal search engine. They make a similar hard cut between AI and autocomplete.

They go on at length about the nature of truth in utterances, and arrive at a conclusion that AI output has no protections for free expression because it isn't expressing shit - it has no beliefs, it is a commercial product only. There are two injunctions that are denied because they are not considered statements of fact, but the judge rules against google for all the ones that were, and concludes several are default considered false because the linked pages were irrelevant.

There is explicit differentiation from aggregating reviews and third party content, because the AI generated text and ideas that were not present in the input. There is also discussion about how there is no excuse for further violations just because its hard to control AI output, and contrasts this with how normal "report and takedown" protections work.

There is very little here that is specific to AI overviews in search, and almost all of the arguments apply to AI products in general. AI's only prayer of being remotely profitable must include advertising or shopping features, which means they absolutely must continue generating output that makes statements of fact about other companies. I know nothing about how German courts work, the article alludes to appeals, but if this ruling holds even just in Germany the ability to insure AI products disappears overnight and that makes the product nonviable.

Edit: Germans, German speakers, and I guess by some miracle if there is a German lawyer wandering by, please feel free to correct me and I'll edit the post

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

designed to handle 1 million transactions per second

that doesn't seem like all that much actually. like it's a lot more than most sites will handle, but in the grand scheme of things, if you're building a distributed system i think the ceiling ought to be somewhat higher.

single-core design

😬

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

an awesome-* list that has been contributed to by claude. what on earth?

Boosted by kornel ("Kornel"):
EndemicEarthling@todon.eu wrote:

They say every #billionaire is a policy failure.

A #trillionaire (a word so obscene my spellchecker marks it as illegitimate) is a civilisation already crumbling, a distortion of human flourishing so severe that it signals (and accelerates) a system destroying the conditions of its own possibility.

Whatever dazzling brilliance apparently shines forth from #plutocracy is merely the glow from the combustion of the house we all share.

Boosted by kornel ("Kornel"):
david_chisnall@infosec.exchange ("David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)") wrote:

I employ a two-pronged defence against phishing:

First, I am so behind on reading my email that, by the time a phishing message actually gets read, the original scammers have probably had their site taken down, or maybe died of old age.

Second, I don’t know any of my passwords and, if your domain doesn’t match, my password manager won’t fill them, and I’m much too lazy to fill them manually, so will probably just close the window. If it looks important, I’ll flag the email and come back to it eventually. Maybe.

Boosted by brib@bribstodon.xyz ("brib :neofox_floof:​ :Nonbinary:"):
brib@bribstodon.xyz ("brib :neofox_floof:​ :Nonbinary:") wrote:

@luna Credit to @JulianOliver for maintaining this list

https://mastodon.social/@JulianOliver/116424124397637057

(His link will also show up properly to logged-out clients 😜 )

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

(I'm reading the decision through crappy machine translate btw and hopefully its clear that's not an actual quote. I continue to not be a lawyer)

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

The judge is basically like "the basis for the entire argument that keeps search engines legal is that they are indispensable for understanding the flood of information online, and its impossible for search engines to evaluate all the context they index. If what you say about "everyone knows the AI overview is not to be trusted" is true then you are fucking cutting your own legs out from underneath you buddy boy. If the thing is not useful, your protections are even more gone"

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
beep@follow.ethanmarcotte.com ("Ethan Marcotte") wrote:

Been reflecting today on how good it’s been for the ol’ mental health to start storing interesting links on my actual website. https://ethanmarcotte.com/stream/

Not sure why, but it’s done me a world of good to store interesting links somewhere *I* own, rather than peppering them everywhere *else*.

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
brennen@federation.p1k3.com wrote:

i think it's fair to say that https://theonion.com/i-work-very-hard-and-i-would-like-to-try-cake/ is at least tied with "guy in philosophy class needs to shut the fuck up" as far as onion articles go. the headline here isn't necessarily better, but as a whole artifact...

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
susankayequinn@wandering.shop ("Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱") wrote:

Men: why won't anyone date us??
Also Men: I cannot be bothered to suggest a way to spend time with you, I will have the bot do the work, also can you provide the prompt?

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
jenniferplusplus@hachyderm.io ("Jenniferplusplus") wrote:

RE: https://hachyderm.io/@jenniferplusplus/116370960046107139

"mythos is too dangerous for the general public"

60 days pass

"announcing mythos for the general public"

Anyway, here's to a time I was right:

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
nileane@nileane.fr ("Niléane") wrote:

RE: https://myke.social/@imyke/116721068646749888

Most of the cis white men commenting Apple's announcements regarding increased parental controls and restrictions on their children's devices are failing to see how dangerous these can be for queer and marginalized kids.

> “It feels like parents today need help to have better tools and guidance to make the right decisions for their children.”

Fuck no. Ask any trans kid whether their parents can make the right decisions for them. It's one thing to want to protect kids (who doesnt?), it's another to provide absolute power to the parents over them like they're their property.

Kids' rights are human rights should not be an empty statement. It should mean fight back against age verification, fight back against their systematic surveillance, fight back against removing kids' rights to digital privacy. And fight back against this insane idea that parents should inherit an almost divine right to police everything about their children's lives.

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

Aahahaahah go fuck yourself google

Offering AI-powered research is "above all an expression of Google's business activities" and "at most a secondary expression of an interest in being able to freely express one's opinion and beliefs."

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

Its awesome how Google's defense here is "everyone knows not to believe the AI overview"

jonny@neuromatch.social ("jonny (nonvenomous)") wrote:

Section 230 only protects you against stuff that other people say on your platform, not what you produce as a product on your platform after all