Sure, but is Google gonna pay them or you hoping they will do that work for free? A browser doesn't seem like a hobby project to me.

Snapneck

I didn't use it but the lack of an explanation is a frustrating response. Give feedback to the feedback??

That layer shows it doesn't make sense to start on your original layer, so let's stop that common line of though too? I can't talk to everyone so this card is currently a single target, negation and destruction :)

I mostly agreed on the other paragraph. Just that friends can not understand but still be supportive, and sad you're not there for games (which are more important than the public would agree).

To pretend they have a choice is what the "free will" assumption is all about - but everything everything else you said was logical.

Though I would disagree about how life changing it can be to stop or not play a video game. It has not been easy for my best friends to understand all the reasons why I can no longer play certain games with them or refuse to play new ones (I use Linux and won't dual boof Windows, I'd rather play open source game and use open source communication software).

Open_Asshole_Intelligence

Not sure why your intuition would go there, I can imagine situations where the caller would feel/be threatened if they didn't remain anonymous. After hearing about people suing for helping them in emergency situations and police abusing people's rights to get evidence then if I felt I had to report something I'd want to remain anonymous.

How often does it end up saving peoples lives though?

Did you pay for this game?

(Edit: just asking, not making a point)

Are downvoted posts also one of the same?

Google Pain Services. Google Pisses Itself API.

If you can't modify it, sell it or know what the game software is even doing then calling that "ownership" would be rather lacking. I mean in terms of traditional ownership, not the modern definition: "page 69 of the EULA defines "purchasing" (the software) as a limited, non-transferable lease which can stop working at any time due to dependency on a proprietary server code we will never share I fucked your mom".

Probably the gun industry lobbying for this 🫢

Do you mean out of touch as in unaware or diverging opinions?

There's a mode where you swipe your finger over each letter in order and it auto completes the word. Not sure how often younger people use it (though I wasn't aware you could do that until I saw someone younger doing it).

Google can make it more difficult but it's like anti-cheat, a losing arms race. In the end users control if adverts play even if Google controls the computer as strictly as North Korea OS.

Words do not have innate definitions and "piracy" can mean whatever you want (when not in a court of law). If people understand what you mean then no direct issue. Due to the association with stealing and murder on boats I won't call copyright infringement "piracy" (thanks music industry propaganda) or when blocking adverts. If you insist on calling me a pirate I will respond with pirate talk, ye landlubber.

Requesting users play ads but giving them the content even if they don't means it's more like asking for a charitable donation than a transaction. They could paywall it but they don't, and it's not like there's a competitor with the same content.

Also, Google feel entitled to record your voice on your phone and send it to their servers. Do they think their users are a charity, or worse?

Next time ""piracy"" comes up this is how I want to write a reply.

Ownership implies a device should be controlled by the user. I don't just mean not playing adverts but how about not recording my voice (or other data) to send it to Google servers for them to keep and exploit? You're free to believe in this implied agreement but I doubt that's in your best interests.

All words are made down.

Paywalling content would easily make this a transaction, but they choose to make this optional.

If Google didn't have such influence over web browser specifications maybe they would give up on adverts - while users are the ones in control of their computers then it will never be up to YouTube what is played on our machines.

By describing what you mean, instead of a word which often leads to discussions on word definitions, you can avoid the latter.

I found saying "homophobia" lead to talk about "I don't fear them" (phobia) rather than discussion on mistreatment. So instead I would say "aversion to homosexuality".

There would be less talking over each other due to word definitions if the music industry had not convicted people that murder and stealing on boats was good way to describe unauthorized copying.

Request I watch an ad but give me content either way means I can decline the ad. Demand I watch ad and withhold until I do, then I have to watch the ad (or seek another distributor). They asked for a donation, not payment.

If it's MY car why would adverts be in it? What's next, adverts in my shed?

GPL over AGPL is a strange choice to me for a collaboration service.

I activate false dichotomy and flip the table.

Copyright is the legal method to limit redistribution of easily copied material, not as if there's anything else people could appeal to.

I ain't a fan of copyright but make it last 10 years instead of X + infinity and maybe it's not so bad. I can't argue against copyright fully as I think copyleft is essential for software.

Sometimes you have to fight with the OS to make it work but that should be due to a bug (or my incompetence in using it). When it's not working because it's actually working on someone else's behalf you can probably delete the whole fucking thing mate.

Consider a universal basic income as a means to reduced the profit motive when authors create/share media.

Mastodon is a bi replacement for twitter.

Not even the taxman?

Normally I'd say that's fine (the store hoster should decide what's there) but it's my understanding Apple actively opposite the existence of alternative app stores. Can they host it elsewhere now?

Anecdotally Apple make it very hard to even post an app but that's neither here nor there.

I'll put 100 on "this user needs their account to do things which in principle need not require an account", please.

"DRM" as in digital restrictions management I assume.

Is it actually better than nothing though?

Either these are tolerant folks or someone we might be better off if they stayed on 4twitter.

If you want to encourage purchasing of storage then contribute to making that an easier task. Charging for overproducing is spiteful and mostly encourages resentment. I wouldn't blame these people for finding a cheap way to avoid the "charge" (and if there is a law that prevents that, it is disgusting).

I suspect others are talking about "thinking" only objectively.

B) If a LLM had a subjective experience when given input presumably it has none when all processes are stopped (subjectively, unverifiable).

A) If a LLM has no input then there are no processes going on at all which could be described as thinking (objectively, verifiable: what is the program doing).