You’re presuming they they had documentation

I thought they already did this in Australia

I thought it was ‘careless people’ he was scared of

Maybe they unzipped the archive? /S

If I understand correctly:

Deciphering the market speak: a computer with defender installed on a corporate network will ignore other computers on the same network unless they also have defender installed. Ignored computers are ‘contained’ by IP address

This sounds like a client problem. Modern Lemmy has community blocks as part of the insurance user profile. Have you tried web client or another app?

Is that why the car has the little horse shaped badge on it?

I’ve been on Mastodon for over a year and the content simply isn’t there. Several of the people that I follow on Twitter have tried moving or duplicating to Mastodon. They’ve had a fraction of the visibility and engagement from commenters that they would get on Twitter. Invariably after a few months they have essentially given up on it as a primary medium. For me the discoverability is essentially non-existent, which I don’t think is helped by the idea of it being based around instance-local communities, which have no meaning when you’re looking at something like Twitter.

Look at what they paid Steve Jobs

Simulated CP is legally considered the same as ‘actual’ CP in the UK

There’s plenty available in larger sizes if you look for ‘commercial display’ instead, e.g.

• 50” 4K iiyama £419.88
• 65” 4K iiyama £911.90

Also you need to move on from ‘as long as you don’t connect them to the internet’. It may have been true once, it isn’t true anymore- see comments here about Roku TV including from OP and discussion on a recent Hacker news thread

This is generally a good article but this section

Erin Rackham proposes being perceived as another type of sense.

She can propose but the link is to a TikTok and meantime ‘gaze detection’ has been disproven repeatedly. Here’s a link to an accessible article by an accredited neuroscientist writing in an academic journal discussing exactly this

So OP has posted this everywhere, even getting it flagged on Hacker News. Article is weak sauce:

I would agree with author that there are many problems with Spotify but concentrating on the artist revenue per stream and then publishing your top hits of the year as YouTube links? Really? Go and find out what the artist share per stream is on YouTube (regular YouTube video) for soundtracks. I’ll wait. Hint: there’s a reason that soundtracks using unauthorised copyrighted work get muted or taken down rather than revenue being redistributed.

Recommending a paid desktop MacOS music app for local content? There are hundreds of local music players but OK… but none of the criticisms of Spotify were about the client! Foobar2000 (mentioned for mobile playback) supports Spotify streaming…

Article seems to boil down to ‘I got tired of Spotify recommendations and I am an aspiring musician at an early stage in my professional career so I am recommending Bandcamp and soap boxing about artist revenue share’ . There’s a reason that people, some with local music libraries in the TeraByte range listen to Spotify. There’s also all the competing services - Apple Music; YouTube; Deezer; Tidal; Amazon; etc…

Recommendation to OP: If you are trying to persuade people on something, then decide what point you want to concentrate on, consider the pro’s and cons for your position, and make your point based/reinforced on that. Don’t meander around a bunch of inchoate personal gripes and affections that don’t really relate to one another or any particular point.

I’m in the UK. Spotify family subscription is £17.99/month (US$ 22.84). Same price as Netflix premium, although I have Netflix standard at £10.99 (US$ 13.96). Now, I know that they give a high percentage to the record companies, source says 70% but really? What are they doing over there? They seem to have some fundamental problems. With Netflix, my history, watchlist, search results, etc. are consistent across sessions and devices. Spotify can’t manage this. Netflix of course produce a significant quantity of original content. Spotify do a few live music sessions. I don’t think that the user experience with Spotify has changed significantly in the last 6 years that I have been a customer.

So they’re not making money. They’re not improving the user experience or meeting the market standard for it. They’re not producing original content and they seem unable to comply with local laws. Why have they not been disrupted by one of their competitors?

Microsoft were hardly early to the game with Windows phones, compare BlackBerry or Symbian. They had some early successes, for instance against Palm. The big failure was to keep deprecating the existing version of Windows phone, in some cases many months before the ongoing version was available, and deprecating the existing hardware along with it. Look at the whole mango/tango Windows phone 7 /Windows phone 8 debacle

Really poor article. Could swap out mention of phone lines for e.g. high street bank branches and nothing would change. What would be useful:

• What’s the legal requirement regarding power cuts?
• What are the regulatory requirements regarding panic buttons etc?
• Why the focus on the over 70’s within the article?
• What’s different for a user for VOIP compared to analogue (apart from the power issue)?
• What are some possible mitigations, e.g. a battery backup and a fallback mobile connection?

Article seems to be mainly about Timnit Gebru. I struggle to see ANY business wanting her on the board. Sasha luccioni, appears to be another AI Doomer, i.e. Up there with Helen toner who

said that if the company was destroyed as a result of Altman’s firing, that could be consistent with its mission, the New York Times reported.

And additionally reported:

The New York Times reported this week that in the weeks leading up to Altman’s firing, he and Toner had discussed an October paper she had co-authored for CSET.

In the paper, OpenAI is criticised for releasing ChatGPT at the end of last year, sparking “a sense of urgency inside major tech companies”, like Google, to ensure they did not fall behind and prompting competitors to “accelerate or circumvent internal safety and ethics review processes”.

Seriously, look at the people in the article, the organisations that they’re associated with and the opinions they’ve publicly stated. The Doomers at open.ai tried a coup and failed. The Accels won. The current board surely wouldn’t welcome or be welcoming to the Doomers. We’re clearly well past the point where people can sensibly pretend that they can hold back the avalanche of A.I. from the board of a single company in the space.

I know right, nobody’s interested in Norman Rockwell anymore

Toner comes across here as an ivory tower academic naïve to the real world. The OpenAi board’s biggest failing in the recent drama was imagining that they had more control than they did, e.g. that they could fire Altman less than a month after his representing the company at an international AI summit with multiple heads of state and the OpenAI DevDay, and that he’d somehow just fade away and the rest of the company staff would meekly follow a radical change in direction.