• 4 Posts
  • 68 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle
  • Thats assuming you already regularly install Windows, which most don’t. It should be the median install, by a normal user. In the same way, I wouldn’t count the experience of a veteran distro-hopper as the standard for setup time on Linux.

    To find and quickly vet a cleanup script on Windows, I’d say half an hour to an hour is a fair estimate, esspecially given that there are a lot of fake or outdated ones out there. On top of that, there a bunch of other settings these scripts often ignore, like web search in start, so I’d say up to another half hour for that is reasonable, esspecially if you weren’t thorough when searching for your initial script.


  • PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.workstolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldMany such cases.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I mean, 10 minutes is pretty optimistic even for a relatively savy user. It took me somewhere around an hour to find and fix everything. On the other hand, it took me and a bunch of people on the Linux support subreddit around 20 hours of troubleshooting to get Linux into a mostly functional state on my PC, at which point I and everyone else had given up, so…

    Its been nearly two years since then though, and given what a nightmare Windows 11 is, I guess I’ll have to give it another shot.


  • I went down this rabbit hole about a year ago, and didn’t have much luck. In the end, the best results I was able to get were from Steam’s Big Picture Mode on a Windows device, mostly launching Firefox (might have been Chrome?) with different launch arguments to immitate a smart TV.

    Most available software either doesn’t support Linux well, doesn’t support streaming services and outside software, or doesn’t support non-kb&m input methods. You can get two, but never all three. You could try SteamOS, now that its out, but unfortunately my hopes wouldn’t be high for it to have all the apps you needs functioning.


  • You seem to be missing what I’m saying. Maybe a biological comparison would help:

    An octopus is extrmely smart, moreso than even most mammels. It can solve basic logic puzzles, learn and navigate complex spaces, and plan and execute different and adaptive stratgies to humt prey. In spite of this, it can’t talk or write. No matter what you do, training it, trying to teach it, or even trying to develop an octopus specific language, it will not be able to understand language. This isn’t because the octopus isn’t smart, its because its evolved for the purpose of hunting food and hiding from predators. Its brain has developed to understand how physics works and how to recognize patterns, but it just doesn’t have the ability to understand how to socialize, and nothing can change that short of rewiring its brain. Hand it a letter and it’ll try and catch fish with it rather than even considering trying to read it.

    AI is almost the reverse of this. An LLM has “evolved” (been trained) to write stuff that sounds good, but has little emphasis on understanding what it writes. The “understanding” is more about patterns in writting rather than underlying logic. This means that if the LLM encounters something that isn’t standard language, it will “flail” and start trying to apply what it knows, regardless of how well it applies. In the chess example, this might be, for example, just trying to respond with the most common move, regardless of if it can be played. Ultimately, no matter what you input into it, an LLM is trying to find and replicate patterns in language, not underlying logic.


  • The LLM doesn’t have to imagine a board, if you feed it the rules of chess and the dimensions of the board it should be able to “play in its head”.

    That assumes it knows how to play chess. It doesn’t. It know how to have a passable conversation. Asking it to play chess is like putting bread into a blender and being confused when it doesn’t toast.

    But human working memory is shit compared to virtually every other animal. This and processing speed is supposed to be AI’s main draw.

    Processing speed and memory in the context of writing. Give it a bunch of chess boards or chess notation and it has no idea which it needs to remember, nonetheless where/how to move. If you want an AI to play chess, you train it on chess gameplay, not books and Reddit comments. AI isn’t a general use tool.


  • PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.workstomemes@lemmy.worldSoon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    Tomska comes to mind as a pretty hilarious example - not just because he turns them into skits, thats normal enough. He had a whole saga trying to figure out how far he could push the boundries of the VPN company sponsoring him before they would start intervening. It started off simple enough, with the South Park philosophy of “Add provocative stuff so they cut that, rather than the jokes we like.” Rather than editting they script, the approved it as is. He thought it was funny, and took that as a challenge. After increasingly crass and violent ads (on-brand for him, and with appropriate content warnings) eventually ended up going so far as to include an ad that even he considers way too far. Said ad later had to be editted out of the video it was included in. In my opinion, despite obviously being very all ads, its collectively some of the funniest content hes made.

    He’s his videos recapping the saga:

    links

    Dear Surfshark, Please Fire Me

    Dear Surfshark, Please Forgive Me





  • Physical copies are kinda besides the point in terms of ownership and preservation. Just because you own the disk, doesn’t mean you have access to the software on it. DRM, as well as the laws that make it viable, have been around since well before media was sold digitally. Physical copies of the Crew are no more playable now than digital. If you want to be able to keep your games, you need to buy DRM-free, whether that limits you to digital-only or not.

    On the other hand, if you want to actually own your games, we need to massively rework copyright law. The fact that a company can sell you a software licence, but add dozens of arbitrary restrictions on when, how and why you can use it is absurd, nonetheless the fact that its always non-transferable and revokable by the company for any reason. None of that should be legal.



  • PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.workstolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldLinux is too hard
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    And after hours of troubleshooting, you give in and join the Discord where you’re promptly ignored.

    Or if you’re really lucky, people are willing to help, so you spend hours more troubleshooting, often repeating many of the same steps, only for all of them to give up too. (As was my experience when I tried to switch to Linux Mint.)






  • I mean, the information was published. People could have shared it more if they cared. Most users don’t. Just look at the backlash he got for comparing ad block’s impact to that of piracy. I still see people citing that as a reason not to trust LMG. If people are that offended by being asked to consider the effects they have on creator income, you really think they’d react well to being told their discounts are hurting creators. They’re already seen as whiney, pro-corporate shills. They’re not going to go out of their way to shout from the rooftops criticism for a company that helps consumers (or was thought to at the time).

    Edit: to be clear, I’m not a fan of LTT, but if you’re going to criticize them, do it for their bias, factual errors, personality, ect. Not because they didn’t go far enough to discourage using coupon codes.



  • What competition has such a rich gambling scene though. No other game I am aware of (Maybe TF2 but, still valve)

    Most mobile games? Apex? Overwatch? Keep in mind, a lot of the CS gambling happens off-platform and Valve doesn’t collect any direct revenue from it, which is why Valve can’t directly intervene in a lot of it.

    Age verification on the marketplace transactions is the more likely scenario, and again, no other game I know of has as much of a gambling community so I don’t really get why other publishers would leave if it doesn’t effect them.

    This argument is specifically in the context of lootboxes as gambling on Steam. Think how much people will spend in lootboxes on your average free to play game. If they aren’t allowed to do this on Steam, games like Apex, CoD, PUBG, War Thunder, ect. won’t stay on Steam.

    Ultimately, I think you’re missing the point of coffeezillas video, which is that a lot of people who were in the skin gambling community are actively or, started in it, as a minor. You are here trying to find all of these excuses for valve not to be held accountable for facilitating gambling to a minor.

    This is exactly my point about Coffee’s argument being muddled in this video, making it hard to discuss. There are three parallel problem here that the video combines into one: third-party casinos, CS lootboxes, and lootboxes in the industry in general.

    In terms of Valve shutting down illegal/third party casinos, they don’t have the means to impact this without also shutting down the entire market for everyone, innocent or guilty. Why should I, as someone who has never even bought a lootbox, nonetheless run an illegal casino be punished for their actions. Even then, casino owners aren’t held responsible, they’re just stopped. On the other hand, with government intervention, no one is caught in the crossfire and casino owners could actually be held responsible for their actions with fines or worse. Why wouldn’t this be the better option?

    In terms of Valve selling lootboxes themselves, yes its immoral, but as Coffee said about the casinos, they’re competiting with other products doing the same and you can’t reasonably expect one side to just role over and accept their loss. Instead, you need to change the system so neither side can use tactics like this. Instead of asking Valve to regulate themselves, and expecting their competition to do the same, you change the law (or just actually enforce it) to ensure that noone gets away with it.


  • A) Valve should not stop casinos from profiting off vulnerable people, because they have already made money off those people and it would somehow be unfair to stop now, which to me sounds ridiculous.

    My argument isn’t that Valve shouldn’t ban them if they have the means. Its that Valve cannot effectively ban them without penalising unrelated users just as much or more. The body that does have the means to do so without putting random users in the crossfire is the government.

    You are using this as an argumentation that the government should ban them instead of Valve, but the end tesult would be the same. The casinos would walk away with the money, and the victims would be left to cry over it.

    In a lot of these cases, even under current law, the government could be fining the individuals running these casinos. As they are run with effectively no oversight, many are blatently rigged, rely on false advertising, or use shoddy, under-the-table finances. That was what the first big crackdown was over - not the existance of these casinos, but the revelation of how rigged they were. As exemplified by the mob tactics being used by these casinos, they haven’t changed. Depending on the location, laws could also be implemented in ways that do go into effect in more aggressive ways, upto and including fining casinos for past actions if its really needed (and to be clear, I wouldn’t be opposed to fines like this being applied against Valve either.)

    B) Poor Valve could not compete with their competition if they didn’t have the money they are gaining from their gambling-adjacent market, which to me sounds even more ridiculous. When Epic attempted to pry open the market using one of the biggest and most successful games ever as a leverage, they largely failed because the Steam user base was too entrenched. Steam is literally printing money right now and they don’t need the CS skin money to compete with anyone.

    When talking about CS, we’re talking about an individual product, and one that is competing with other products where lootboxes and other manipulative tactics are already the norm. As you said, this isn’t about Steam. Valve is still a buisness, and their products are still a part of the market. They’re not going to just spend money to run a game they lose money on. Even if they do stop selling lootboxes, that doesn’t fix much because you’ve got thousands of other companies also trying to hook the same addicts on their gambling products. Instead, you need to impose limitations industry-wide, to ensure one product can’t get ahead by just being more abusive. Since we obviously aren’t going to have Valve, EA, Ubisoft, Epic, ect. all come together and agree to stop putting gambling in their games, we need a higher power to do so, that being the government.