Source

I’d argue that with their definition of bots as “a software application that runs automated tasks over the internet” and later their definition of download bots as “Download bots are automated programs that can be used to automatically download software or mobile apps.”, automated software updates could absolutely be counted as bot activity by them.

Of course, if they count it as such, the traffic generated that way would fall into the 17.3% “good bot” traffic and not in the 30.2% “bad bot” traffic.

Looking at their report, without digging too deep into it, I also find it concerning that they seem to use “internet traffic” and “website traffic” interchangeably.

no where near Reddit yet on niche subjects

I’m always saddened by how not-active some of those subjects are. For example: Even many large games struggle to have dedicated, active communities on Lemmy (assuming I’m not terrible at finding them, which is sadly also possible). Even some of the largest games have only completely dead communities here. A huge draw of Reddit for me was to be able to talk about the games I play with other people who do too. And mostly, the games I’d love to talk about aren’t in the top 10 most played games list.

Now I could try to (re)vitalize those communities I would love to see around, and I have done so shortly after the exodus (on my previous account that died with the instance it was on). However, there’s only so much talking into the void I can do until it gets boring.

I also feel like that might be a big issue for people coming over. After I manage to explain to my friends how federation works, they ask me to help them find the [topic of their interest] community, and all I can show them is a community with 10 threads, all over 3 months old and with 0 comments. Sadly it shouldn’t surprise anyone they’re not sticking around after that.

From everything I’ve seen, they’ll hear it, take it as an excuse to claim you weren’t complying, bust down your door based on that and shoot your understandably agitated dogs.

Good luck.

I was curious too and checked the article but skimming it, instead of a total, I found this:

A new analysis from MUSO, a U.K.-based anti-piracy analyst […]

With the study being done by a clearly biased person/group and that large omission, I think it’s fair to assume that the % of total web traffic going to pirates might not have gone up all that much, maybe it even went down.

In Roguelikes and Roguelike-adjenct games there are also a few games that get close. (I’d even argue some totally eclipse SV/Terraria in that regard, but that depends on your definition.) Some, but not all, of them are even completely free and open source.

Off the top of my head, a few examples would include Dwarf Fortress, UnReal World and Nethack. Maybe some Space Station 13 servers if you count that too.

I’m guessing they just generate a bunch of pictures, pick the closest and fix the rest in photoshop.

Not like real models aren’t already often photoshopped to (near) unrecognizability.

Merriam Webster says either is okay.

I interpreted it more as a “I’m willing to sacrifice all Ameircan’s right for anonymous free speech, which I do value, to take away that of foreigners too.” which is a typical braindead racist take.

While I agree with you and also agree with the decision to not show it anymore, I do want to highlight this bit that you wrote:

instead dad physically abuses the misbehaving child and nothing is ever resolved

The positive thing is that it never (or so raraly that I wouldn’t remember) presented the strangling as anything good or helpful. Instead it was always presented as a shortcoming of his personality. Homer is mentally ill equipped to solve conflicts with Bart non-violently. Strangling him was his only outlet and (at least to attentive viewers) it was clearly and evidently damaging Bart’s development. This is for example demonstrated in a scene where Bart has such a trauma that he’s getting “strangled” by thin air when he thinks his dad would go for it.

Also, with the knowledge that Bart is, to some extent, Matt Groening’s self-insert, that does raise some rather unpleasant questions.

Ignoring the fact that they were clearly talking in orders of magnitude, it was 8MB for a very long time and only recently got increased to 25.

I went and skimmed the paper because I was curious too.

If my skimming is correct, what they do is similar to adversarial attacks on classifiers, where a second model learns to change as few pixels as possible to confuse a classifier into giving a wrong prediction.

Looking at the examples of dogs and cats: They find pictures of dogs where by making only minimal changes, invisible to the naked eye, they can get the autoencoder to spit out (almost) the same latent representation as an image of a cat would have. Done to enough dog-images, this will then confuse the underlying diffusion model to produce latent representations of cat images when prompted to generate a dog. Edit for clarity: Those generated latent representations would then decode into cat images.

If my thinking doesn’t fail me, this attack could easily be thwarted by unfreezing the pretrained autoencoder. In the paper that introduced latent diffusion they write that such approaches already exist. If “Nightshade” takes off, I’m sure those approaches would be refined and used. Even just finetuning the autoencoder for a few epochs first should be enough to move the latent representations of the poisoned dog images and those of the cat images they’re meant to resemble far enough apart to make the attack meaningless.

Edit: I also wonder how robust this attack is against just adding an imperceptible amount of noise to the poisoned images.

I disagree. The placeholder should be 0 (or even better, a negative number if the system allows it).

Otherwise you’ll have people who will end up paying the $1000, believing it to be what they owe.

In a strange way, having it be ridiculously high was a benefit since it got this person to complain. If it was something high but still within in the range of plausibility, he might have overpaid. That being said, it being ridiculously high could also (as the article suggests) be used nefariously to scare people into showing up in court.

I’ll save you some time and give you the definition by merriam webster:

any of various crimes (such as assault or defacement of property) when motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group (such as one based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation)

It’s murder (a crime) with racism as the main motivator.

BlockTube

By now it allows to block (remove) other things: Auto-generated playlists, Explore page, Shorts, Movies and a few other things.

I mostly use it to block content about stuff I don’t want to get spoiled on. It supports regex so it’s fairly easy for me to very rarely see anything that would diminish my experience from a specific piece of media (assuming I don’t forget to do it in the first place…).

I think it would be fine as an official extension. Shipping it built-in feels weird to me.

You might not be able to stop an AI directly because of the reasons you listed. However, OpenAI is probably at least competent enough to not send the response directly to the AI but instead have a separate (non-AI) mechanism that simply doesn’t let the AI access the response of websites with a certain line in the robots.txt.