It’s the Network effect. At the end of the day, Lemmy is still a lot smaller than Reddit, and of course that means there is less content, especially in more niche communities. The only way to really improve the situation is to grow the network with more users and more diversity.

I feel like the activity level is good enough to use it mostly, but I also still check in on Reddit regarly because some communities are simply very inactive on here.

I guess what you can do as an individual is to post more content, participate in the community, and help spread the word that the fediverse even exists.

Nah man, this is just some divisive bullshit. How many people have you converted by leading with telling them they’re getting cucked? I think it’s a much greater chance that if you ’accuse’ someone of ”cuckloading” they will just become defensive.

I am also a bit impressed how quickly you brought US politics, slavery and world wars into a discussion about online privacy.

Jesus Christ this is such a toxic attitude…. If you want people to take you seriously I don’t think being an ass about it and rage-baiting people is the right strategy.

I’m like 90% sure that this post is AI Slop, and I just love the irony.

First of all, the writing style reads a lot like AI… but that is not the biggest problem. None of the mitigations mentioned has anything to do with the Huntarr problem. Sure, they have their uses, but the problem with Huntarr was that it was a vibe coded piece of shit. Using immutable references, image signing or checking the Dockerfile would do fuck-all about the problem that the code itself was missing authentication on some important sensitive API Endpoints.

Also, Huntarr does not appear to be a Verified Publisher at all. Did their status get revoked, or was that a hallucination to begin with?

To be fair though the last paragraph does have a point, but for a homelab I don’t think it’s feasible to fully review the source code of everything you install. It would rather come down to being careful with things that are new and doesn’t have an established reremovedtion, which is especially a problem in the era of AI coding. Like the rest of the *arr stack is probably much safer because it’s open source projects that have been around for a long time and had had a lot of eyes on it.

The free version is mainly just a number of user and device limit. Although the relaying service might be limited as well, but that should only matter if both of your clients have strict NAT, otherwise the Wireguard tunnels gets directly connected and no traffic goes through Netbirds managed servers.

You can also self-host the control plane with pretty much no limitations, and I believe you no longer need SSO (which increased the complexity a lot for homelab setups).

That seems to be the terms for the personal edition of Microsoft 365 though? I’m pretty sure the enterprise edition that has the features like DLP and tagging content as confidential would have a separate agreement where they are not passing on the data.

That is like the main selling point of paying extra for enterprise AI services over the free publicly available ones.

Unless this boundary has actually been crossed in which case, yes. It’s very serious.

My guess is that this is a propaganda effort meant to counter that EU countries is putting pressure on social media to moderate hate speech and importantly disinformation.

Having an official US government site means both that it will have higher apparent legitimacy (compared to a random X post) for people who want to believe. It’ll likely also mean that there is no European corporate presence to pressure so the only option would be to escalate to blocking the entire site, which I don’t see happening tbh.

That is kind of assuming the worst case scenario though. You wouldn’t assume that QA can read every email you send through their mail servers ”just because ”

This article sounds a bit like engagement bait based on the idea that any use of LLMs is inherently a privacy violation. I don’t see how pushing the text through a specific class of software is worse than storing confidential data in the mailbox though.

That is assuming that they don’t leak data for training but the article doesn’t mention that.

It sounds like you are assuming that the wallet needs to re-validate each session and I don’t see why this would be needed. Each user account would just need to validate their age once then the website operator could store this in their database. If you’ve validated once you can be sure the user keeps being old enough.

They’re probably not going to use it…

… but if they do it’s going to be a hell of a good starting point in motivating people to leave Facebook

I believe something like this is supposed to be a use-case of the digital EU Wallet. A website is supposed to be able to receive an attestation of a users age without nessecarily getting any other information about the person.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Digital_Identity_Wallet

Apparently the relevant feature is Electronic attestations of attributes (EAAs). I’m not really familiar with how it will be implemented though and I am a bit afraid of beurocratic design is going to fuck this up…

Imo something like this would be magnitudes better than the current reliance of video identification. Not only is it much more reliable, it will also not feel nearly as invasive as having to scan your face and hope the provider doesn’t save it somewhere.

Honestly you pretty much don’t. Llama are insanely expensive to run as most of the model improvements will come from simply growing the model. It’s not realistic to run LLMs locally and compete with the hosted ones, it pretty much requires the economics of scale. Even if you invest in a 5090 you’re going to be behind the purpose made GPUs with 80GB VRAM.

Maybe it could work for some use cases but I rather just don’t use AI.

Maybe i misunderstand what you mean but yes, you kind of can. The problem in this case is that the user sends two requests in the same input, and the LLM isn’t able to deal with conflicting commands in the system prompt and the input.

The post you replied to kind of seems to imply that the LLM can leak info to other users, but that is not really a thing. As I understand when you call the LLM it’s given your input and a lot of context that can be a hidden system prompt, perhaps your chat history, and other data that might be relevant for the service. If everything is properly implemented any information you give it will only stay in your context. Assuming that someone doesn’t do anything stupid like sharing context data between users.

What you need to watch out for though, especially with free online AI services is that they may use anything you input to train and evolve the process. This is a separate process but if you give personal to an AI assistant it might end up in the training dataset and parts of it end up in the next version of the model. This shouldn’t be an issue if you have a paid subscription or an Enterprise contract that would likely state that no input data can be used for training.

For now, BMW is defaulting to a more traditional approach. If it requires a data package of some sort, it will probably have a recurring fee—and BMW says its customers are already comfortable subscribing to such add-ons.

Sounds like a fairly reasonable position imo, and that they listen to the outrage about heated seats (which tbh was ridiculous). I get the feeling that everyone who commented on this didn’t actually read the article, lol.

Full disclosure: I own a fairly recent BMW and do like it a lot. Would I have bought it with subscription based heated seats? Maybe not, but I do appreciate other things like having a physical button to go into battery save mode and not having to dive 3 touch screen menus down… or that it’s one of the most powerful hybrids in electric only mode (though not anymore I think)… or being generally more dialed back when it comes to driver assist features.

That said I will admit that it has a physical button that tells me to pay up when pressed, to enable automatic high beam control… though it’s not like it was an advertised feature (got it used).

I can’t really tell if you’re joking or not but no, I’m saying that it’s a bug, and at no point anything is sent off your computer

I like that the article excerpt clearly says that it’s simply about files not being removed when the trash bin is emptied, and it’s a problem specific to the Canonical snap system… Yet every single other comment in here rants about Microsoft spyware. Not many people read beyond the headline, lol.

At some point I saw images posted on what was supposedly Epsteins server setup, and given the disgusting shit they were up to it’s not even a little surprising he would keep it on hardware he fully controls. So of course there will be some technical documentation in there.

At the same time I’m kind of shocked how much of these emails happens on seemingly regular @gmail.com or @yahoo.com addresses.