https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/05/google-searchs-udm14-trick-lets-you-kill-ai-search-for-good/

You can use something like udm14.org or a browser plugin to force web searches only

🫪

Fair, I guess I was referring more to their home grown JavaScript interpreter.

Well, technically yt-dlp too but that don’t help much for actually browsing.

I mean, so long as it remains configurable and they don’t change the entire project. I don’t see an issue with giving folks the option to mask the name in environments where they might not want to attract anyone’s ire.

We also um… the shuttles?

I already deleted the app from my phone once they introduced modal overlay ads that you have to dismiss

That’s fair. I guess it could be no different than a scientist with some grand scheme handing his plans off to others to implement.

I think I was assuming that cutting edge AI research involves more math/theory than just… bootstrapping existing tech stacks and tweaking configs.

Wouldn’t an AI researcher naturally find generative AI disadvantageous because they are attempting to develop novel tools which could not exist in the training set in the first place?

No

Thanks I figured that out lol. But still, why comment it here? 🙃

There’s a watermark on the page of a TikTok account… “heiress_ke”. Seems like a Kenyan account.

I suspect those are bots pulling in context from that username somehow?

Or folks who get off on providing zero context for their musings, who can say

Edit: seems like this is one of a series of posts.

Eg: https://mander.xyz/post/48382396

Where do you see this in the post?

I know that bandwidth isn’t hardly the finite resource that it used to be, but I still can’t get over how amazingly wasteful it is to continuously stream live video halfway around the world just so you can… ask your glasses to describe what’s in front of you?

1000%

And TIL the phrase “violent agreement” 😆

Yeah I agree. And while the onus of that implementation is on developers to comply with the law, there is still negative impact on end users by creating those barriers.

It isn’t mandating you affirm you’re older than 18. It’s asking explicitly for your age or your birthday.

While the API then would take that data to transmit your age bracket to other systems.

This might not be drastically burdensome on an individual workstation, I’ll stand corrected on that. And it’s not disclosing your actual birthdate to anyone either (though I still feel like it should be my choice whether or not to store that information on my personal device).

In either case, we started with this “affirm your age” kind of law on various kinds of restricted websites (pornography and alcohol) and it’s easy to just lie. So now that is now morphing into more invasive age verification strategies.

I view this law as easily circumvented theater that has the aside effect of being a slippery slope toward more aggressive anti-privacy systems in the future.

Im not sure I understand your point about this law being for developers not users.

The fines may only be applied to operating system developers for failing to implement these systems… but having those systems at all still drastically impacts end users in a negative way.

Not once we get fusion reactors up and running, then we’ll be drowning in that sweet sweet helium-4

Insane