It’ll always fight to go there, because least offered most gained is the name of the business.
Sure you can split them up and regulate them, that’ll last for a few years or decades but money is power and they will wield that power to undo it all again, time after time to seek profit.
The only solution is a system that doesn’t value capital.
It can do more than that. Unions aren’t solely about pay increases, they can enact all kinds of change in the unionized company. If the members of the union don’t like that Google is now shifting gears to making killbot drones (this is not something I just made up), a union could demand they stop doing that, and if the demand is loud enough, the company has to listen or go out of business.
Building a metaverse that people want to actually engage with was too hard, so he’s decided to scale back his ambitions and tackle something less difficult: AGI.
Hey also. Gopher is also getting a bit of a hit, but mostly due to a new protocol someone came up with called Gemini. It's like Gopher a lot but has some (and I cannot emphasize this enough) very basic markdown.
You can find out more about it here. I recommend Lagrange for your client. Two places I like to go to are Station (gemini://station.martinrue.com/) and Antenna (gemini://warmedal.se/~antenna/). BBS (gemini://bbs.geminispace.org/) is also a new one on the scene.
And the nice thing about Lagrange is that it also supports the Finger protocol which basically is a way to read the .project or .plan file on a given user for the indicated system. Those files for those that never used them allowed a user to type a short status update into them that folks could then poll at any given time. Basically "ye olde status update".
There's a person that serves a weather reporting system via a finger interface at (finger://graph.no/) and it works really well in Lagrange.
Gopher lost out to WWW in part because Gopher was proprietary. The University of Minnesota owned the code and proposed to charge server owners for using it. Meanwhile Sir Tim over at CERN was handing out the original httpd under an MIT-style license.
There was some early work supporting things like forms and search on Gopher. But it was pretty much abandoned as soon as WWW started catching on.
Oh, it was - before we had the WWW. I remember the day when a co-student told me to have a look at this new web thingy, “like gopher, but with hypertext!”.
Wow thanks for this comment, Lagrange works incredibly well. I had a lot of fun trying out Gemini, I had been doing Gopher recently but Im definitely going to add this to my goofing around.
I’m probably never buying a car newer than the one I have. Everything is so ridiculous now. Though if I can just physically disable the WAN communication it uses I guess that’s fine too, though it would likely be expensive to get working again for resale.
It bothers me enough that my car is even capable of doing any kind of steering input I didn’t give it myself, brakes are by wire too, but fully depressing the pedal still connects you to the hydraulics directly so kind of a non issue, it allows for AEB which is a good safety feature though I’ll likely never trip it.
My current car I think can do some kind of connection but I disabled it in the firmware when I flashed the BCM. Not missed, did nothing of benefit to me afaik.
Physically disabling WAN can be a workaround, assuming is can be done and reverse without damage. But it’s not a good solution.
Manufacturers have ways to degrade experience/features when the owner physically disable WAN: deny features and security updates (by doing OTA updates only), drag their feet or void warranty if WAN is disabled, design some features to be unnecessarily dependant on some cloud/online services (eg navigation, media features, …).
They cannot void your warranty over that, maybe for the computer you modified but the Magnuson Moss warranty act means they have to honor the warranty unless they can prove your modifications caused the damage.
Also, who cares if it gets updates? It will continue to work as it did from the factory indefinitely. Security updates aren’t necessary if the car isn’t connected to the internet and those updates cant change how the immobilizer/keys work anyways.
Things can suddenly or progressively break after a while if a system gets too far behind regarding updates.
A few plausible examples:
The navigation system can send you to non-existing road if it doesn’t know about recent major roadworks. Or give you old/bad speed limit and cause you to get a ticket.
The GPS receiver may fail to obtain a location if satellite orbit or other parameters shifted too much since the last update (happened to me once after several years).
A bug may manifest itself only after a while or a given date (similar to y2k) and break some features.
A vulnerability may be discovered, which make cars that aren’t updated easy to steal as knowledge of the vulnerability spread
All new cars - Bruce Schneier wrote in cryptogram that he tried to buy a new car without a permanent internet connection to the manufacturer and it wasn’t possible.
Really goes for almost everything. I don’t want my machines and appliances to be ‘smart’ and ‘connected’. I just want them to do the thing I use them for, that’s it.
I think the distinction is need. I dont like it when its mandatory, but i dont mind that the option is there. E.g some people like preheaing their oven on the drive home(or a warning that something on the stove is on if accodently left on), or in case of the dryer, when its done.
One common one I think is helpful is those who may have forgotton to close their garage. Easy way to check without having to drive back and do so.
Sadly, I think they will get them, one way or another.
All it will take is a handful of people desperate for money agreeing to be 3d scanned, and maybe a few months of interns saying yes/no to particular faces, and bam, hundreds of extras ready to be used and abused for decades to cover.
I don’t really see a problem with this. Is it so much different from making a good 3D model?
We’re talking about assets that will be used for generating massive crowds. That’s already done with CGI. These scans aren’t even “AI”… they’re just like metahumans in Cryengine.
This guy just put the term AI on it because it freaks everyone out.
If you take the $200 for a motion and body scan and you sign your rights away, that’s what you get. This isn’t a change to how Hollywood already operations. Fear-mongering for nothing.
And this is why unions are important. If it’s a single desperate person, then the big corporation gets its way. But if it’s a union, the corporation has to negotiate.
That’s not what’s happening here. These extras are being paid the same to act in the background of a shot, just like always, but the studio expects them to give up the rights to their likeness forever after so they can try to replace them.
The studio expects the extras to participate in the destruction of this job with nothing in return.
Hopefully people end up owning their likeness regardless if it’s a lengthy contract and are made to be paid fairly and compensated for streaming rights as well. I feel like we are approaching same time frame as non compete clauses becoming illegal in comparison to AI generated images/actors. They are already working to make their likeness illegal to be used for pornography. IMHO I think the actors and the writers s tricking together signifies a united front and could force change as long as the powers to be don’t bleed them out beforehand, but I’m hopeful with suck a strong backing social media wise and industry (the workers not the owners).
Crowd extensions are already pretty common with traditional VFX techniques.
I worked in Hollywood editorial for a bit and, IMO, the producers are playing up the AI stuff so that said stuff can be given to the writers and actors as a "victory" instead of the real spectres in the room:
streaming residuals need to get the same payout and transparency as home video and syndication did
streaming numbers need to be made available to creators to facilitate the above.
the 'mini-room' system that totally disconnects writers from the productions they are writing for needs to be broken down.
It's because the producers want their counterparts spending time, energy, and perceived social capital negotiating over it rather than the things the Producers actually worry about having to give up.
IMO it's pretty transparent, but creative people are pretty scared of AI right now so it might be a good bargaining tactic if they can get rank and file Union members to tie up the negotiatiors by reacting.
I think a combination of 3d animation and ‘ai postprocessing’ is probably the most effective result.
As much as I respect the rights of extras, they are expensive and easier to replace than lead actors. Disney already has things setup so extras never have to be on set with your lead actors, although you get a lot of backgrounds with ‘people just walking back and forth with no purpose’, but a bit more effort will mean those prefilmed backgrounds wont even require human actors, they barely do already.
Which is why these union negotiations are so important. Sure, that will probably happen. But if SAG-AFTRA says they can’t be used on union shows, well, they won’t be lol
When I first started in film any time I had a SAG actor there were requirements I had to adhere to for their pay and hours, no exceptions. And I live in a right to work state!
Only if Hollywood wants to go completely non-union. Good luck with that. IATSE isn’t going to crow a movie if SAG-AFTRA and the WGA aren’t involved. Maybe they’ll find enough non-union crew to do a big time movie, but they’ll be making it in the Philippines.
In the long term, AI is going to be such a massive force multiplier that you'll be able to get away with non union writers and actors.
If all goes well you will be able to produce a film in your basement and have it rival the quantity of the current big boys. That will be a long while, but in the meantime any industry that loses a 2x productivity boost will die to its competition.
Especially in the modern world. Centralized stars and production is crazy in a world where you can pull out a camera and buy a rendering supercomputer for a few thousand dollars.
Maybe years down the road, but we’re talking about today. Making a non-union movie and expecting it to be something like a Marvel movie- it won’t. It will be a movie that will end up on Mystery Science Theater 3000 because it will suck.
There’s a difference between “no AI allowed” (not what the unions are calling for) and “contracts need stipulations about AI usage”
If those contacts include paying actors as much as they would have needed to act and restricting it's usage when writing scripts the difference is moot. If your erase all benefit to using AI it becomes worthless.
They 100 percent want to reduce AI usage so that writers can't be automated away.
Mr. August, a screenwriter for movies like “Charlie’s Angels” and “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” said that while artificial intelligence had taken a back seat to compensation in the Writers Guild negotiation, the union was making two key demands on the subject of automation.
It wants to ensure that no literary material — scripts, treatments, outlines or even discrete scenes — can be written or rewritten by chatbots. “A terrible case of like, ‘Oh, I read through your scripts, I didn’t like the scene, so I had ChatGPT rewrite the scene’ — that’s the nightmare scenario,” Mr. August said.
The guild also wants to ensure that studios can’t use chatbots to generate source material that is adapted to the screen by humans, the way they might adapt a novel or a magazine story.
Right-to-work is the work-for-welfare program. I would imagine it would have no impact on people who aren't applying for social services.
I'm assuming the overlap between right-to-work and at-will-empmloyment states is a near perfect circle, though. And the fun thing about at-will employment is that it's totally nullified by an actual, mutually negoatiated employment contract, with, like, responsibilities laid on the employer and consequences for failing to perform them. You know, like what you get with a strong union.
I think this is the right-to-work they were referring to: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law. It’s a type of law that undercuts unions by preventing shops from requiring union membership for employment.
Probably unpopular opinion: I hope that happens sooner than later.
I always saw packaging every piece of software for every distribution as a lot of duplicate work that could be better used somewhere else.
As an example, Gentoo's default repository has ~18k packages (not to mention the many other packages in additional repositories), each one of them with its own building script, maintainers and tests.
Most of those packages are also present in other Linux distributions, again with their own maintainers, different building scripts and having passed their own tests.
Doesn't that sound like a lot of duplicated work for each distribution that could be used instead on improving the core system and pushing the burden of packaging applications upstream as flatpaks?
Also, since flatpak packages dependencies with the application, they could fix the dependency hell problem in a big part because the developer will determine what dependencies your package runs with, instead of relying on whatever version of the dependencies may be installed in your system.
And it could also solve the quick death of Linux applications. I'm sure most of you saw how quickly applications get unusable in Linux. You find an application you like, but because it was developed for an older version of some library (like OpenAL or GTK+2) you cannot use it anymore.
Have you seen that in Windows? You can still use most of the applications developed for Windows XP in Windows 10.
That of course has its drawbacks. Because you are packaging dependencies with the application, you will have duplicates of the same library for each application, but I think that's a fair price to pay for more stable and durable applications. That's very similar to what Windows applications do.
I'm talking about flatpak. Like most of the people here, my experiences with snap were bad, I am not interested in it and I think it's Cannonical going their own way.
I hope the opposite, because I bloody hate how everything is a huge package. I don't want to download a bunch of massive packaged apps just because one library needed to be updated, or have one packaged app with a persistent security flaws because - despite me updating the library in my system - it's still running an older version.
I hate that shit doesn't work because the monolithic container conflicts with local security policies (for example, when I couldn't use separate browser profile directories).
Everything is huge now and while drives are bigger these apps are taking way more then their fair share
I hate running "mount" to see my partitions and seeing a dozen freaking snaps.
It may be a useful solution for a few key apps - similar to the "portable apps" on Windows but I don't want everything to be a damn snap and personally wish I had more choice as to what was (but in make cases they've supplanted native packages entirely).
I still prefer Chrome over Firefox but I’ve been running Firefox for over a year now and won’t go back to Chrome because fuck Google. Also stopped using Google for searching and not being tracked is very very noticeable.
Tried using chromium based browser instead? You are not mainlined into Google that way. Vivaldi is absolutely great. It’s got way better baked in features than chrome which can reduce need for extensions and it has a strong commitment to pushing chromium as far as possible to be privacy conscious. Runs and syncs across Android and pc as well.
Those are all chromium based. They all are connected to google and will all have the manifest v3 change.
That is unless they will support v3 but keep some doors open for content blockers ( this is mozillas plan )
Yes all chromium based browsers are chromium based. What do you mean by they are connected to Google? Yes Google provides the chromium code, but my Vivaldi browser isn’t connecting to Google servers or sending them anything
What i meant is that chromium is owned and managed by google. If chromium ( and therefor all chromium based browsers ) gets a change, they all do by default. Things like vivaldi or brave will get this change unless they specifically implement ways around it, which i dont think they will.
Though its way less than chrome, chromium still has links with google and has been found to ping google once in a while even though youre not using google.
To be accurate, chrome in itself is a chromium based browser. Its chromium with google stuff slapped onto it.
Its because of this that i find the “but im using [chromium based browser here], so i wont be affected by change x” a false one, because they will.
I am corrected, thanks :) Im legit surprised they did anything towards the issue, so thanks for pointing it out.
That said, ad blocking is only a part of the problem and there are a lot of extensions that work on content loading in browsers that are going to be invalidated with the chromium update that an integrated ad blocking feature ( that i hope you can customise to your hearts content ) will not fix…
It’s a sad state of affairs modern schools have when an instructor tries to pull up a video on YouTube or other sites to use in class, and an entire classroom of children have to sit through the unskippable ads.
I guess I’ll take that over the TV documentaries my teachers used to record on VHS that had commercials to fast forward through, but the modern internet truly sucks.
Yup and a significant portion of those ads are definatly not school appropriate… From the mobile game ads that show a mostly naked lady, alcohol, soft-porn (chatbot type stuff), jump scares and whatever other crap google exempts from their “guidelines” for a quick buck.
The only (official) way to have all kid firendly ads is to use YouTube Kids, which also blocks all the usefull educational videos for anyone older than 4.
It is a good point: other platforms [other than iOS] have an easy solution (Firefox), but on Chromebooks you’re relatively locked in because you have to jump through hoops installing the Linux environment in order to use it.
Google’s Admin Console has an option to continue enabling Manifest V2 extensions. Most schools would be wise to lock down which extensions they let users install anyway, and the zero trust approach is to just deploy what’s needed for access to curriculum.
Can we just STFU about this mediocre ad already? You’re giving it more airtime and more mental bandwidth. I didn’t think it was worth one day of headlines much less two or three.
I have to read the headline to ignore it. That puts the ad in my brain, which is what the purpose of the ad is. The post itself is doing advertising despite being negative. I don’t want to think about ads. Fuck em.
Ignoring things like this is how we’ve ended up with an entire generation of people who Apple thinks are either too lazy or too stupid to create art or music on their own.
Note that I am not calling anyone lazy or stupid, I’m just stating Apple thinks this is a desirable outcome and is pushing forward with that plan
Assuming you’re being condescending, some people don’t have the physical capability to plan an instrument. That should stop them from having apps to create music just because a small handful of people who dislike Apple are offended by a commercial that was largely computer generated.
Great counter-point. So we are offended by a commercial AND calling for a ban on differently abled people from using music creation apps! How many differently abled people in your life would love a $1000 iPad designed for an able bodied person? Or would they want something designed with them in mind? Speaking of condescending. "Sounds like a you problem. Don’t piss on everyone else’s parade. “I think a lot of people here are confused and angry at clouds” “I’m sorry your music career didn’t pan out after all that work. Not everyone can be a musician.”
If you point is that Apple makes great products that enable users to be creative with few limits, but like every corporation there are things to complain about… then yes, we are on the same page, my dude.
Between working two jobs, never paying off student loans, unobtainable housing, and medical bankruptcy, yeah you’re right. Let’s just get our dopamine fix and be content with our squalor.
So the solution to that is to only make paint-by-numbers music that Apple will allow you to make with their pre approved apps? That sounds like a good way to end up with a lot of mediocre easily digestible music that all sounds the same…
There are plenty of apps that let you do your own thing. Don’t blame the software for musicians being derivative. People have created amazing digital music with significantly less technology. Maybe you just don’t like that people without a formal background (rich people) have the opportunity to make bad (and good) music.
It sounds like your only problem is that you have to use the App Store. So what app was denied by Apple but is available on Android? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
I have been playing guitar for nearly 20 years. My family has never been rich, which meant I got the most affordable guitar available (which cost MUCH less than an iPad even accounting for inflation) when I started.
I knew absolutely nothing about how to play it and taught myself for the first year from stuff I found in magazines. When it became apparent that I wasn’t going to just abandon the thing in the closet my parents agreed to get me lessons for this costly sum of $25 a week.
Since then I have have scrimped and saved to get nicer instruments when I could afford them, and they mean a lot to me so I take care of them and play them often.
When making music becomes reduced to a game from WHICHEVER app store, it loses all meaning because there is zero invested in it. I’m sure there will be a few people who actually manage to make real music this way despite the limitations, but for most people it will just be a toy they lose interest in like Candy Crush or something.
If it were easy to play decent music then everyone in the world would have a top 10 hit
I see the confusion here… You think playing music is something one does to get fame and money. What you’re describing is a content creator, in which case I can see why having an overpriced toy that makes songs for you would be appealing.
For the record I have, in fact, played for a number of audiences and even recorded several albums with various bands that I’ve been in over the years. I’m sure you wouldn’t have heard any of them because they never really made it beyond the local scene. I’m perfectly fine with that though, because I didn’t make them to be famous. I made them because I enjoy the creative process involved in songwriting and performance, because I’m a musician.
Aww good for you, my dude. But it’s pretty mean to say that other people, who have music inside them, should be denied. Not all music made using technology is 100% digital anyway. It’s a studio in your home. It allows people who aren’t able to go into a studio, for whatever reason, to produce near-professional music.
Here’s a thought, if you don’t want to listen to music created using an Apple product, then… don’t.
You are delusional to think even one of the 9 million kids living in poverty in the US would buy a $1000 iPad as a tool to make music. In 5 years that fucking $1000 iPad is only worth cracking open to harvest as e-waste. A kid buying a $50 dollar pawnshop guitar is far more likely to continue to make listenable music than some fucking dipshit buying an iPad. Maybe in 5 years they can sell that guitar for $50 to another kid who will successfully make music. Or maybe they luck out and that guitar is worth $5000. The kid who can afford to buy the $1000 iPad will hopefully use this as a chance to learn about planned obsolesence…
Here’s a thought, maybe an iPad is a wasteful piece of garbage technology. Maybe this isn’t a rant about technology and preventing opportunities, maybe its a rant against shitty technologies that are wasteful.
Does anyone know an even slighty successful musician who uses a 5 year old iPad? Now, are there any slightly successful musicians that we can think of that use a 5 year old (affordable) guitar? Or a 5 year old computer? How about a cheap drum machine or sequencer? How about giving a kid anything but a $1000 iPad (or a 5 year old paperweight)
I think somebody here is mixing up performing music and composing it. Which have almost nothing in common.
I haven’t touched Apple stuff for composition (don’t even know what it is), but I seriously doubt it’s going to take away all the headache of learning music theory.
And when you do know music theory, you can use plenty of things for digital music. It’s just hard.
So right. I saw a DJ playing incredible chiptune off’a two original brick gameboys and two LSDJs and it was absolutely amazing. I wish I had the skill to do that.
I did get shown the ad, I thought “huh, it’s not like Apple to do ragebait marketing”. I thought that was just what that is, and that everyone can see that. The “Newphoria” marketing tagline I think was verging on it as well, but I didn’t see anyone moaning about it online. Much harder to avoid for me because it was on giant billboards and shop signs.
I guess it’s just working as intended if people are recycling it every day into news fodder, not like there’s anything else going on in the world (ongoing genocide? No we have four tweets about Apple’s new ad and boy are these tweets strongly worded!)
Agreed. People like to get upset over nothing. It’s a stupid commercial that landed poorly. Someone in the marketing department has way too much control and probably didn’t do a very good focus group for this.
There are plenty of other things about Apple we could be complaining about.
theregister.com
Hot