Notices by Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)

@mhoye LMAO

ROFLMAO.

Get fucked, Microsoft.

@x41h @resplendent606 You're really committed to being an asshole...

@mcc @mayintoronto Yeah, but I mean people want not to be perceived as something bad, and go out of their way not to.

@x41h @resplendent606 We've got better things to do than listen to AI simps on their "inevitability" bs while the scam is crashing down around us.

@mayintoronto @mcc I'd think away. Nobody wants to sound like slop.

@smitten_ Um, aren't you talking about Facebook?

Anything here stays exactly where it was, in chronological order, unless someone deletes it. And you can turn off automatic loading of new posts if they mess up your scrolling.

@yoasif Do it. Fucking do it. You'll make Mozilla irrelevant and invigorate the forks to take over as the only real Firefox.

@resplendent606 @Em0nM4stodon Nobody is even trying to make their own indices, just better obfuscate that they're scraping Google & Bing. It's so pathetic. Indexing would not even be *that* hard if you don't try to get slop. Start your crawl with reputable roots like "sites that have been cited on Wikipedia consistently over time without reverts removing them" and go from there.

@x41h @resplendent606 Um no. 🖕

@avandeursen I disagree that a CC license grants the right to process a work with AI and to present the output under the authors’ byline. But, even if we set this aside, there are many papers in the DL that are not CC licensed. Will they be excluded from these features?

@JonathanAldrich @csgordon @hovav @avandeursen Also: while it may not infringe copyright on the CC-BY papers, it's both (1) misrepresenting the derivative as faithful summary of the work, and (2) it's infringing copyright on an obfuscated subset of millions of other works that were incorporated into the LLM without authorization.

@csgordon @hovav @avandeursen Thank you. I have raised the issue, suggesting they remove this feature (or at least pause it pending a robust internal discussion & proper policy & implementation).

ACM is now showing an AI “summary” of a recent paper of mine on the DL instead of the abstract. As an author, I have not granted ACM the right to process my papers in this way, and will not. They should either roll back this (mis)feature or remove my papers from the DL.

Science lazyweb, are there any inexpensive liquids with freezing point around 1-2 °C?.

Aside: a top Google result is an AI-slop blog claiming adding salt to water will do that. 🤦

@skinnylatte Some of the ppl at Mozilla are genuinely doing their best to do good, but the management is the worst dotcom era tech shitheads with everything that entails for their ideas about how the world is supposed to work. And they're bad at even that.

@DanielMReck @w7voa They should be archived as evidence but don't need to be broadcast. This is not just my opinion. It's solid advice from people who've spent their lives studying what works and doesn't fighting fascism.

@fasterthanlime It's so bonkers to me that ppl are actually using this shit.

@w7voa Can we PLEASE not rebroadcast fascists in their own words? That's doing their job for them. You can report on what they did or said without letting them have the power of direct quotation to get their words in front of people.

@adwright Has the writer reported the account and sent a C&D to birdchan's legal department?

@astraleureka @dne @ska @jpmens Yeah the additional section (glue) has no rrsigs. So the only thing you can legally use it for is opportunistically sending queries there (which will fail to validate if it's forged and forging results). You can't commit the glue records to cache because they don't have signatures and you don't a priori know whether the zone is insecure.