• 0 Posts
  • 30 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle

  • These are the quotes this article is based on according to another news outlet, and it is unsure if the translation (especially the wording for the proclaimed statement in the title) is up for debate since there are multiple translations.

    (“from the river to the sea,” according to an English translation on the Israeli news channel i24NEWS.

    According to other translations, Netanyahu said that Israel “must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River,”)

    "Every area that we evacuate we receive terrible terror against us. It happened in South Lebanon, in Gaza, and also in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] which we did it.”

    “And therefore I clarify that in any other arrangement, in the future, the state of Israel has to control the entire area from the river to the sea.”

    "This truth I say to our American friends,” Netanyahu said Thursday. “And I also stopped the attempt to impose on us a reality that will jeopardize us. A prime minister in Israel has to be able to say no, even to the best of friends. To say no when you need to and to say yes when you can.”

    Does anybody know what “proposal” the USA made that he’s referencing?


  • I’m not so sure – YouTube is much larger than you might think. It’s not the video platform you grew up with anymore. No one in this world can match the backlog and content density/diversity of YouTube, not even all streaming services combined. People complaining that YouTube is dying because a few YouTubers “retire” from their main gig or that it’s not the same anymore don’t understand how YouTube works. They might not comprehend that the time of their “bubble” has come to an end. When this happens, there are already five new bubbles/niches that are even bigger, and you might not have heard of them, but they are more successful than their “predecessor.” The old bubble is still there to consume in the backlog. Someday in the future, AI will have a field day with the data accumulated via YouTube.

    It is transforming, for sure, but I don’t think it will destroy itself completely. In a sense, you can say it will destroy whatever view you had of YouTube as a platform because it is not what it once was.

    To my knowledge, YouTube will hit the billion-user milestone this year (Netflix currently at ~250 million paid users). If we look at other data trends from streaming services, it suggests that YouTube will grow more over the coming years. I don’t know how anyone can match YouTube as a whole. In certain niches, sure, but as a whole, it would be like fighting windmills. There’s a reason no one tries to tackle YouTube as a platform and only goes for certain niches.


  • I mean, if I were an investor looking at this, I would also get excited about making this change - much less risk, less cost, less customer support, etc., all for basically the same output in revenue. In other words, if I cut the small business (6% of value but over 100k accounts to handle) out of the model, I can make more money because the cost reduction is higher than the loss of revenue. And in the long run, when “big game customers” jump ship, I just downsize some more. I also don’t need to invest but can be sure it will generate a certain amount of revenue, as long as I do not squeeze the relevant customer groups too hard. This strategy is very feasible and relatively risk-free. I am not a fan of it, but I think a lot of software companies will go this way after they establish themselves in a market.


  • Well, I hope you are right. xd

    It just seems to me like a monopolization of the market by the big tech corps, which won’t be beneficial to the majority, but at least a few billionaires will get richer.

    I was recently invited to the Google research center where they presented their new AI assistant features, which should be coming this year. It was weird; it was at the same time more capable than I thought and more restrictive than one would assume. It’s like not even Google knows exactly what to do with it, or what it should be able to do, or what exactly it is capable of. I also once got to try an “uncensored” / “unrestricted” information model, which was actually a bit scary but far more useful than any of the current “restricted” chatbots. I’m sure AI will change things up, but how, when, and why I don’t know, and the more I find out, the more unsure I am about predictions, besides the one that big corps will try to monopolize the market.


  • The funny thing is, copyright doesn’t even matter; at least half of the world’s market couldn’t care less about copyright, especially if it’s from the “west.” They certainly won’t suddenly start respecting copyright law. They will use and develop AI without the restriction of copyright. All this talk about copyright and the law, and all the copyright suits against AI and tech firms, will be fruitless since we either forget copyright like we used to know it, or we get left behind in development because we need to respect the copyright of everything and make contracts with every big outlet, etc. Big tech knows that, so they walk this gray zone walk to still train AI on copyrighted material but somehow proclaim they are not copyright-dependent.

    I’m not saying this is a good development, just that I think we need to reassess how we treat copyright on a fundamental level under the current development structure of AI.

    We need to slow down the development of AI and hinder monopolization of the market. My guess is it’s too late, but we can still hope that maybe this time it will be different.




  • I know of one person in my wider circle who reacts also pretty bad when children are being children around him. In his childhood, every time he was loud, wanted attention, or just did what a child does, his parents (they did not even want children; he was an “accident”) got really angry at him. So children being children is a trigger for him.

    Talking to a trained professional helped him immensely to handle this.


  • I think he’s pointing out that in the future, this could lead to regulatory measures by the government because they get pressured by the big corps that AI locally is dangerous, but AI with big corps is all good and the right way. Which is an understandable concern. It’s not about you using whatever model you’re using; it’s about the broader philosophy of how AI should be integrated into our world. He’s saying the big corps are trying to monopolize the AI market, which is valid because that’s what’s happening right now.


  • In other words, the market is nearly saturated now, and Evernote makes its money with business people and institutions who often adhere to the “don’t change a working system” principle regarding their “tools.” Most of them will just keep paying if the functions are needed and already integrated.

    It’s a model most of these types of companies adopt sooner or later if they are for profit, and investors see the potential of this business as almost exhausted. It’s: grow, establish, grip, and squeeze.


  • If you really want, you can use almost any cloud-based solution that allows you to sync folders, with some caveats.

    I use Obsidian with my Google Drive; it took me about 5 minutes to set up, and it works like a charm now. However, you need to set it up on every device you plan on using for synchronization. Also, you cannot work on the same document on two devices simultaneously. Otherwise, it works as you’d expect.

    It’s definitely messier than the Obsidian cloud, but for my needs, syncing it via Google Drive is more than enough.



  • I get your point and understand where you’re coming from. I think you’re right from a certain perspective.

    But I want to add that it doesn’t matter that they declared they want to stop shipping to Israel; if the entire trade route is affected, it’s just terrorism, plain and simple. Securing vital trade routes and sending a clear signal that this conflict won’t spiral is crucial for stability.

    Also, this is an international issue (trade route security), not purely an American one. While the U.S. could handle it easily by themselves, it would lead to more significant problems and conflicts in the long run.

    I just believe inclusivity is always better than exclusivity.



  • Again, I do not argue for or against separation, XD.

    very basic summary: You said they steal money; I ask how. All these sources say otherwise. You said these sources are propaganda; I asked how is the argument based on the data from the INE propaganda. You did not respond and insisted that people I spoke to are lying because I don’t have a “source” for their OPINION.

    Bro, what’s your point? No one is out to get you or is interested in internal Spanish politics enough to intentionally spread propaganda in the comment section of a random Lemmy post that maybe 80 people scrolled by, most likely not even living in Europe or near Spain and don’t care.



  • Interesting perspective, but these attacks were different from what they did before. I can see the argument that the Israeli government downplayed their preparedness to make Hamas’s attack more devastating than if they had taken it seriously from the beginning. This tactic could then be used to partially legitimize retaliation and the subsequent siege of Gaza.

    There are too many factors at play for this to be a “normal” Hamas attack gone wrong. The scale and preplanned targets suggest it was not an “ordinary” Hamas operation.

    While I usually agree that the simplest solution is often the right one, do you really believe this was more or less a “normal” attack that spiraled out of control?


  • Apologies for the misunderstandin of your statement. My bad.

    Why do you think China, one of the main trading partners with the West, should not be expected to participate in securing a primary trading route, especially after expressing a desire to play a more proactive role in securing the Middle East?

    Certainly, the recent surge in attacks stems from the Israel/Palestine conflict. While one could argue that we all bear some responsibility for reaching this point, the attacks on trading routes are carried out by a third party financially backed by another entity, mainly Iran. These attacks, though related to the conflict, involve non-direct participants, including the ships they target. This categorizes them plainly as terror attacks on a trading route, and there’s no need to let it escalate or reach a point where other uninvolved groups might be tempted to join in.

    I agree; China’s best move for now would be to sit and wait, maintaining distance. It gives them more breathing room. China, especially the CCP, has its interests in mind and isn’t particularly interested in helping causes that don’t further their goals. More “chaos” in the Middle East is something CCP leaders would likely appreciate.


  • You meant it intensified; they existed and attacked the shipping route before this conflict escalated.

    Also, many people forget the modern West uses retaliation as a tool against terrorism. Basically, if you mess with civilians, you’ll face swift and harsh consequences. The attack legitimized a retaliatory response.

    That’s why it was confusing when Hamas initiated this phase with a terror attack, as Israel would invoke the retaliation card, supported by the USA. Humanitarian concerns become secondary to the objective of neutralizing or controlling Hamas. Crying for more humanity or boycotts won’t significantly change the priority list.

    The best outcome Hamas could have hoped for with the attack that started this is what’s happening now: chaos, more hate, conflict, and the end of normalizing relations between the USA and some Middle Eastern states. They knew Israel would use the “9/11 card,” and the USA would allow and support it.

    Just to be clear, I neither support any form of “genocide” nor take sides in the Israel-Palestine conflict. It’s odd to categorize so broadly and inclusively.

    If you believe China’s reluctance to participate in these maneuvers is due to the genocide allegations, then it’s improbable, considering China isn’t known for opposing genocide, (especially against Muslim groups). Practically, what Israel is accused of aligns with China’s agenda – acquiring land, eliminating cultures, religions, and populations based on ethnicity. Just because China is more discreet doesn’t make it morally superior.

    Example here: Uyghur genocide.