Wow that’s actually pretty cool. I wonder how many paper authors will actually be looking at it though.

They didn’t just “happen to be around”. They created the entire ecosystem around machine learning while AMD just twiddled their thumbs. There is a reason why no one is buying AMD cards to run AI workloads.

Actually Google tries their hardest NOT to point you to content. They scrape the data from sites and display it directly in the search results so that you don’t need to visit any site except Google. Their new AI answers that they are pushing on users are just another step in that direction.

Wtf does a kill switch even mean? PCs have kill switches on them already, in the form of a power switch.

Chrome decided not to support it because they want to push AVIF instead. Firefox followed suit. Then Apple actually decided to support JXL. It has a decent amount of support in desktop software. So it’s basically fine for personal use, but don’t expect to use it on the web unless Google changes their tune.

I have not encountered any issues in revanced. Maybe check and make sure it’s updated?

Headline talks about AI, article talks about algorithms. Chasing that click bait I see.

Did they offer you any compensation for training on your data, like the article says?

You may wish to disable automatic updates and follow release notes.

Advertisers are already tracking everyone. Firefox is providing another option to help preserve privacy. You still have the option to disable or block anything you want, Firefox hasn’t taken that away. This doesn’t effect you, it effects the average user who doesn’t already block everything. I don’t see how having a new option that helps preserve your privacy is a bad thing. The goal would be for this to catch on, and then eventually be able to prevent more personal tracking that occurs through cookies today. It would be a net benefit.

The article is quite interesting and has nothing to do with Google customizing results based on location, which many commenters seem to be assuming. Rather, the article is taking about how you can get dramatically different results by searching for the same thing in different languages. While that is pretty obvious, since the “same word” in two different languages is effectively 2 entirely different words to a computer, there are some interesting implications to it.

Article is about subtitles. And says the dataset has been around for 4 years.

Isn’t privacy invasion (ie, cookies) already ON by default? What’s the difference?

Well there is not really any reason to speculate if you read the article. They say it’s the sound. It reaches 90 decibels right outside of people’s homes. Some people are literally losing their hearing, and doctors in the article say that exposure to loud sounds can cause all of these heart issues.

This bill seems somewhat misguided. How in the hell is something like a large language model going to cause a mass casualty incident? What I am more worried about is things that could more realistically pose a danger. What if robotic dogs patrolling the border have machine guns mounted on their backs, then a child does something unexpected and the robot wipes out an entire family? What if a self driving car suddenly takes off at full speed through a parade? They are trying to slot AI into everything now, and it will inevitably end up in some places that are going to cause loss of life. But chatbots? Give me a break.