seriously? they got duped by a random protonmail account? good grief, actual retards work for verizon.
this should highlight why you should always protect yourself from these soulless uncaring corporate gargantuans that have zero desire to protect your basic data.
use PO boxes, JMP.chat numbers, email aliases, etc. never give out info that can be used to screw you over.
Fairphone should provide you sufficient privacy and security and give you ethical points. I have played with many OS’s. GrapheneOS is hands down the best. I have used it for years. If only it would run on a fairly built device such as Fairphone, it would be stellar.
Trying to do it myself but I’m stuck with YouTube.
I mean, I need a gmail account to pay for the Premium sub. And then, most creators are still using YouTube not the few alternatives… How do you guys do?
Pihole hasn’t blocked YouTube ads in years because the ads come from the same domain. And that’s not including the new crackdown that YouTube did on ad blocking.
I’m not trying to criticize anyone here for their choices, I’m just curious about the actual effects of such a subscription.
As of now the most basic one is 14usd/month, how much of that money gets to the creators that you Want to support? As of the writing of this response I don’t know this information nor searched about It. Do we have an actual diagram or any information saying how much are you contributing for each channel you are subscribed to?
Suppose you are subscribed to 28 channels and the sub money gets distributed evenly, that’s 50 cents a Month to everyone, not much “paying their due” in my opinion.
Now if you really really want to patronize one, two or three channels, wouldn’t sending money directly to them or paying their exclusive membership be a more reasonable way to go about It?
Disclaimer: I use uBlock Origin myself, as I really don’t like being forced to see ads.
That said, I don’t think paying for content is ‘barbaric’ either. It’s a personal choice. Either you want to pay and you can, or you don’t want to, or you simply can’t. All three are fine by me.
As a teen, back in the 80s, I could not and did not pay for content (it was not online back then but copying music, books and even movies, or computer applications was a thing). Since then I got a few jobs, and the money that come with them. So, I can support the creators I like and I don’t need to spend time copying anything or searching for workarounds to access it. Be it on YT, or anywhere else. I would love to not pay Google, mind you, but since so, so many creators are still only hosted there, and since YT premium makes it so easy to pay them (a single monthly payment)…
Fair point! See my answer on the other user’s message where I talk about targeted patronization instead of overall subscription, I’d love to hear your opinion about it
I’ve read it. Since you asked my opinion, here it is ;)
As of now the most basic one is 14usd/month, how much of that money gets to the creators that you Want to support?
(to be precise:) I don’t pay 14/month to support creators. I pay 14/month to be allowed to skip the ads that support those channels while still supporting the creators and YT. That’s what I’m paying for, and that’s what’s advertised in big bold face when you look at the YT Premium sub page:
OK, that plus YT Music but I don’t care much about that forced bundle (I use Apple Music). Not a word on supporting creators… Because we know its ads that are supporting the creators, not the premium subscribers. As a premium, I just pay to skip ads. The difference is essential.
Suppose you are subscribed to 28 channels and the sub money gets distributed evenly, that’s 50 cents a Month to everyone, not much “paying their due” in my opinion.
Creators do chose to sign upon YT knowing it’s ad-revenue that will pay them, not the viewer’s money (unlike say, on LTT Floatplane). As a a viewer, YT gives me the choice to a) watch those ads (knowing a small share will go to the creator) or b) pay a Premium sub to skip them (knowing a small share of my Premium will go to the creator). I chose b).
Is it enough revenue for each creator? It’s not to me to say. Not more than it is the creator’s job to worry if I, as a viewer, earn enough money myself to be able to afford the price of the YT sub ;)
Imho, a much more interesting question to ask would be: how much money to a creator gets from YT ads versus how much does the creator gets from a Premium viewer watching the same video? I’m willing to bet they get more from a premium than from the same viewer watching ads or at the very least that they get the exact same value but, quite obviously, I have no idea at all.
In the end, it’s a simple question of offer and demand. I want to watch X creators. Most are on YT. I can skip YT ads for a fixed amount of money, knowing that if i pay that money all creators will be compensated at least the same as if I watched the ads. Win-win. If it happens those creators consider ad-revenues are not enough, it’s a whole other issue. An issue they should discuss together between creators, and with Google. Not with the viewer or… only if it is to discuss the possibility of leaving YT and see how many viewers would be OK to follow them elsewhere and to pay to support their work.
I understand your view, it’s indeed a lesser hassle to just pay the subscription and be done with It.
I can be wrong about It, but judging by how big corpos operate things most of that sub money probably will end up in the company account, not the creators (again, I can be wrong about this).
Wouldn’t you say that using an adblock and supporting creators directly (hot take here since you could want to support 50 people), be a more reasonable and better approach?
Ads are fine, but while the company is being obnoxiously intrusive and predatory towards Its customers, it’s hard to just pay to not be inconvenienced.
judging by how big corpos operate things most of that sub money probably will end up in the company account, not the creators.
Agreed. Suffice to see the valuation of those corps. It’s not the tooth fairy that gave them all their coins ;)
That said, it is YT that host the gazilion of disk space required to store the videos, it is them who manage the website and all our accounts and payments, it is them who deal with comments and moderation, it is them that finds advertisers for creators, and it is them that provide everything else I’m not even aware of. Do they dot it perfectly? Nope ;) But they do it and they too should be compensated for that. And it certainly not free: disk space cost real money, as people’s salaries, even for Google. COudl they share it more generously? I’m willing to bet yes. But it’s up to the creators, not to me the viewer (I would view them on any other platform they chose).
Wouldn’t you say that using an adblock and supporting creators directly (hot take here since you could want to support 50 people), be a more reasonable and better approach?
Better, I don’t think so: it’s the exact same money that is spend in a way or in another. It woudl also ends up costing me more. Which I probably would not agree with.
Reasonable? Well, it can. It depends your priority. Mine, as a viewer is not to have to spend too much of my free time in managing subs and payments. What I want on YT is to watch stuff and have a good time, not turn that into another job of mine (or then I should get paid, like for any job ;)
To be clear, if I had to micro-manage every single creator I like to watch, I would watch… a lot less of them. A lot. I can only think about two, maybe three.
And that would not be good thing for either the other creators and for Google/YT. As a publicly traded company, Google, needs to be perceived as successful (aka, having a lot of views at every single second) and creators themselves, they need the views in order to, well, become popular. No view, no popularity (no popularity, no sponsors). Note that I did not say they need ‘Premium/paid views’ or ‘ad-supported views’. They need all the views they can get, even the ones behind ad-blockers. Ever wondered why YT doesn’t punish users of ad-blockers by not counting their views as legit views? ;)
Ads are fine,
Not by me. I think they are not. I consider ads (and the constant profiling that comes along) a major threat to our society (very personal opinion, but mine nonetheless).
That’s why I’m happy to pay to skip them (while still using an ad-blocker and multiple browsers, to make sure tracking is really screwed). That’s also why I pay for my search engine (kagi.com: zero ads, zero tracking), that’s why I have not owned a TV set since the very early 00s (when TV ads become so prevalent in my country, France): since there was no way to skip ads on TV, I stopped watching TV (I value my time, and my peace of mind, much more than any series or show… and then I can now watch them ad-free on Netflix or anywhere else if I really want, which is not that often). That’s also why I use iOS and not stock android (less tracking less ads, less Google), that’s why I also use a GNU/Linux Debian laptop and a Mac desktop. And that’s why I will never use a Microsoft product ever again: I stopped using Microsoft the day they decided to introduce ads in their OS, making it obvious to anyone all the tracking that was going on. I refuse that. Ads in the OS, ffs…
but while the company is being obnoxiously intrusive and predatory towards Its customers, it’s hard to just pay to not be inconvenienced.
Sorry, I’m not sure I understand that sentence (I try my best to get better but my English is still so limited). Would you mind explaining it otherwise?
Try Invidious, FreeTube, NewPipe,… All allow you to watch regular youtube content without ads. You can also create instance local accounts to “create playlists” and “subscribe” to people.
Actually compared to most of the image generation stuff that often generate very recognizable images once you develop an eye for it the LLMs seem to have the most promise to actually become useful beyond the toy level.
Yea i use chatgpt to help me write code for googleappscript and as long as you dont rely on it super heavily and or know how to read and fix the code, its a great tool for saving time especially when you’re new to coding like me.
Model collapse is likely to kill them in the medium term future. We’re rapidly reaching the point where an increasingly large majority of text on the internet, i.e. the training data of future LLMs, is itself generated by LLMs for content farms. For complicated reasons that I don’t fully understand, this kind of training data poisons the model.
It's not hard to understand. People already trust the output of LLMs way too much because it sounds reasonable. On further inspection often it turns out to be bullshit. So LLMs increase the level of bullshit compared to the input data. Repeat a few times and the problem becomes more and more obvious.
Obviously this is a privacy community, and this ain’t great in that regard, but as someone who’s interested in AI this is absolutely fascinating. I’m now starting to wonder whether the model could theoretically encode the entire dataset in its weights. Surely some compression and generalization is taking place, otherwise it couldn’t generate all the amazing responses it does give to novel inputs, but apparently it can also just recite long chunks of the dataset. And also why would these specific inputs trigger such a response. Maybe there are issues in the training data (or process) that cause it to do this. Or maybe this is just a fundamental flaw of the model architecture? And maybe it’s even an expected thing. After all, we as humans also have the ability to recite pieces of “training data” if we seem them interesting enough.
They mentioned this was patched in chatgpt but also exists in llama. Since llama 1 is open source and still widely available, I’d bet someone could do the research to back into the weights.
Yup, with 50B parameters or whatever it is these days there is a lot of room for encoding latent linguistic space where it starts to just look like attention-based compression. Which is itself an incredibly fascinating premise. Universal Approximation Theorem, via dynamic, contextual manifold quantization. Absolutely bonkers, but it also feels so obvious.
In a way it makes perfect sense. Human cognition is clearly doing more than just storing and recalling information. “Memory” is imperfect, as if it is sampling some latent space, and then reconstructing some approximate perception. LLMs genuinely seem to be doing something similar.
I bet these are instances of over training where the data has been input too many times and the phrases stick.
Models can do some really obscure behavior after overtraining. Like I have one model that has been heavily trained on some roleplaying scenarios that will full on convince the user there is an entire hidden system context with amazing persistence of bot names and story line props. It can totally override system context in very unusual ways too.
I’ve seen models that almost always error into The Great Gatsby too.
This is not the case in language models. While computer vision models train over multiple epochs, sometimes in the hundreds or so (an epoch being one pass over all training samples), a language model is often trained on just one epoch, or in some instances up to 2-5 epochs. Seeing so many tokens so few times is quite impressive actually. Language models are great learners and some studies show that language models are in fact compression algorithms which are scaled to the extreme so in that regard it might not be that impressive after all.
How many times do you think the same data appears after a model has as many datasets as OpenAI is using now? Even unintentionally, there will be some inevitable overlap. I expect something like data related to OpenAI researchers to reoccur many times. If nothing else, overlap in redundancy found in foreign languages could cause overtraining. Most data is likely machine curated at best.
Exactly. The government isn't your friend. To your government you're a cog in the machine and nothing more - misbehave and they'll rip you out and replace you with another
You guys are walking the line of being prisoners. I was in NSW a couple years ago, beautiful country. Too bad its run by nutobs. After seeing the shit during COVID when the thought police were showing up at peoples houses for Facebook posts, I felt for you guys bad!
Govt’s are always corrupt, but when it makes it down to the police at that 1984 level, that’s when its time to pack the bags! Might as well be in China at that point.
Spot on. My wife and I are actually making plans to move overseas. I'm ready to get out of here, but she wants to wait until the next federal election to get a guage on where things will be heading. In the meantime, we're saving as much money as we possibly can, because Australia isn't the country it used to be, and it's clear that we're both deeply-incompatible with the general culture of apathy, government trust, and rules, rules, rules. It's suffocating.
Most of the country are change hating small c conservatives who genuinely believe the state knows best and is totally trustworthy. They get their news from the Daily Mail or The Sun because Britain is the best country ever. Its the mindset that ensures we still have a class system, a monarchy and brexit.
Because we're becoming increasingly like the US, where half of the country (or at least those who actually turn out to vote) are hellbent on voting for a party that doesn't give a single shit about their needs, just as long as they drivel out some racist shit now and again.
As @breadsmasher said, “Torys fucking the country? Better vote for them again!”
I moved my number to VoIP.ms and while it’s not nearly the same service wise, SMS do come to my email and I can call and receive calls via any VoIP app I want.
There’s an appealing notion to me that an evil upon an evil is closer to weighingout towards the good sometimes as a form of karmic retribution that can play out beneficially sometimez
I’m glad we live in a time where something so groundbreaking and revolutionary is set to become freely accessible to all. Just gotta regulate the regulators so everyone gets a fair shake when all is said and done
Enshittification is the norm for all for profit endeavours. Exceptions to this are exceedingly rare and usually just a matter of time rather than truly being an exception.
Well thats just short sighted. Theres barely a reason for the average consumer to even think about plex let alone sell em on anything. Maybe if they tried to resurrect DVD sales or become the bandcamp of movies they would have a plan. But just a media organizer? Theres no way those investors are getting that 80mil back.
I wouldn’t consider WA secure. They do tracking, they have your phone numbers and those of all of your friends and know exactly who you talk to, when, and how often. Even if they don’t know the content of the message because it’s encrypted, that’s a lot of information for the algorithm to feed on. Apart from that, I’m not sure if they have access to the encryption keys. They might be able to decrypt everything if they want.
I’m sure someone wrote a lengthy blog article about WA. But unless someone does a proper security audit including where the encryption keys are stored and the implications of that and how extra features like breaking encryption in case someone flags an inappropriate post turns out… The ‘it’s safe’ is just a claim by your brother or Meta. You’re free to believe in anything you want. But it’s not necessarily true.
With the new European regulations Whatapp will soon be forced to offer some compatibility towards 3rd party apps, so there are chances that perhaps bridging in this way will become easier in the near future, or at least have some level of official support. But we won't know for certain how will it work until it happens. All we know is that Whatsapp is currently working on a way for 3rd parties to connect with them.
Personally, I'd hold for a bit to see where does that go and then decide what method to use.
I don’t want to sound overly negative here. But that idea is more a hypothetical proposal “we should do something about it” at this point. There is a working group mimi. But not even a draft or technical proposal, yet. And interoperability is hard, and they also want to come up with a solution that makes it secure, the messages confidential and maybe grant anonymous access. These problems aren’t solved at all as of today. On top you have to deal with spam, malicious servers, users, lawful interception and all kinds of things in a distributed platform. Then they need to come up with a text for the regulation. Write it, discuss and do several revisions, debate it. And there will be lobbyism against it and court cases because it cuts into the business model of large companies. Then it has to be adopted into national legislation and it will get a grace period.
So if you want to wait 'til 2029 (or so) to reply to your mom, go ahead and wait for the EU. I don’t have a crystal ball to be sure, but I highly doubt that this will happen in the next few years.
And on top, there is no guarantee that it turns out good or usable in the first place. There is a lot of lobbyism happening in the EU. Especially by big tech. They’ll find a way to make it a thing that just connects Apple, Meta and Google and exclude independant or secure services.
So, while I'm very skeptical that the result will be satisfactory, I'm very curious to see what will Whatsapp come up with when the deadline hits, because, allegedly, they are already working on it.
I’m curious what Meta is going to unveil. Usually big tech companies get ahead of legislation, in order to set a standard they like, or to prevent possible more strict regulation from happening. We see the same thing with AI and practically everything the big tech companies lobby for. I’m a bit wary.
Whatsapp is under the hood still a lightly modified XMPP system, and given Zucks recent comments about federated protocols (albright in a Threads i.e. ActivityPub context), they might just get their XMPP federation working again.
Jellyfin is generally just as easy to set up for external access. The only thing you really need to worry about is having a dynamic IP. If you have a domain name, then setting up dynamic DNS is quite straightforward.
The only issue I have with people remotely accessing Jellyfin is that you cannot set a total system bandwidth cap. You can set a per stream cap, but that doesn’t help if you have too many people accessing your server at once.
I got a free subdomain from freedns.afraid.org and they have a script you can just add to your crontab to periodically check your IP and to update their DNS listing if your ISP changes it
I certainly agree that it adds an element of complexity. I had never dealt with anything like this before and had to learn it, but it really is a pretty easy thing to setup.
Sure, but neither are self hosted media servers, and if you can afford/run the one you can afford/run the other. Domain names are cheap as dirt and aren’t all that complicated for anyone running a home server.
Huh? You need an open port and a TLS certificate, that’s about it. If you’re CG-NATed you need some form of proxy in front, but that’s not Jellyfin’s fault.
privacy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.