Oh, that’s really cool. I hope there’s more linkage between the twitter-like and reddit-like islands of the fediverse in the future; I’m somewhat interested in reading the former but it seems to be complicated to actually get federation with it.

Sure, in Firefox itself it wasn’t a severe vulnerability. It’s way worse on standalone PDF readers, though:

In applications that embed PDF.js, the impact is potentially even worse. If no mitigations are in place (see below), this essentially gives an attacker an XSS primitive on the domain which includes the PDF viewer. Depending on the application this can lead to data leaks, malicious actions being performed in the name of a victim, or even a full account take-over. On Electron apps that do not properly sandbox JavaScript code, this vulnerability even leads to native code execution (!). We found this to be the case for at least one popular Electron app.

Huh? What do you mean “if”? Such a PDF vulnerability literally did happen a few months ago; fixed in Firefox v.126: https://codeanlabs.com/blog/research/cve-2024-4367-arbitrary-js-execution-in-pdf-js/.

There’s no real need for pirate ai when better free alternatives exist.

There’s plenty of open-source models, but they very much aren’t better, I’m afraid to say. Even if you have a powerful workstation GPU and can afford to run the serious 70B opensource models at low quantization, you’ll still get results significantly worse than the cutting-edge cloud models. Both because the most advanced models are proprietary, and because they are big and would require hundreds of gigabytes of VRAM to run, which you can trivially rent from a cloud service but can’t easily get in your own PC.

The same goes for image generation - compare results from proprietary services like midjourney to the ones you can get with local models like SD3.5. I’ve seen some clever hacks in image generation workflows - for example, using image segmentation to detect a generated image’s face and hands and then a secondary model to do a second pass over these regions to make sure they are fine. But AFAIK, these are hacks that modern proprietary models don’t need, because they have gotten over those problems and just do faces and hands correctly the first time.

This isn’t to say that running transformers locally is always a bad idea; you can get great results this way - but people saying it’s better than the nonfree ones is mostly cope.

Incredibly weird that this thread was up for two days without anyone posting a link to the actual answer to OP’s question, which is g4f.

There is no world issue that can be solved by just throwing money at it. Those issues have had MUCH more money thrown at them than all of the net worth of all billionaires on Earth combined, without being solved.

That seems obviously false, unless you’re proposing that all the charities in the world are scams and don’t actually do anything. I guess you could argue that as you throw money into saving lives, the low-hanging fruits get picked and the cost rises, so you can never saturate all the charities - but this is a very weak argument, since saving 99.99% of all the people in the world from hunger or poverty would be about as good as 100%. Just because there’s diminishing returns doesn’t mean it’s a doomed cause.

I think you have exactly the opposite impression of wealth than how it is in reality, then. Billionaires typically have only a tiny amount of their wealth in liquid funds (what you call “holding” money) - most of their wealth is in investments, and hence “in the economy”. So the thing you’re proposing already holds.

Day ???/??? of downvoting every post with advertiser-friendly censorship in it.

All money is “entirely fake”. The only difference is how big the value fluctuations are and to what degree you can exchange it for other currency. Crypto has a big problem with the former and minor problems with the latter, but generally speaking it’s not much less real than, say, the US dollar.

The thing I said I did? Yes; here’s the processed image:

If you mean the math in the post, I can’t read it in this picture but it’s probably just some boring body-of-rotation-related integrals, so basically the same thing as I did but breaking apart the vase’s visible shape into analytically simple parts, whereas I got the shape from the image directly.

This roughly checks out. I’m getting 66%, based on the methodology of cutting out the jug’s shape from the picture and numerically integrating the filled and empty volume (e.g. if a row is d pixels wide, it contributes d^2 to the volume, either filled or empty depending on whether it’s above or below the water level).

Ivermectin is a human antiparasitic too. But more importantly, I’m pretty most of this is just a myth. The stories I’ve seen about mass ivermectin hospitalizations turned out to be hoaxes, see e.g. here. If you literally took an entire horse-sized dose (200μg/kg for a 700kg horse, so 140mg) as a 60kg human, you’d get a dose of 2.3mg/kg, 11x the recommended amount for infestation - which has been tested in humans to be safe. Ivermectin is amazingly safe for a drug; you have to really try to get an overdose.

So I think a few people (seems to be ~several hundred for all of US in 2021) did somehow manage to actually get themselves poisoned (I’d love to know how; I think I saw a statistic once about what dosages were found in ivermectin poisoning cases but I can’t find it in my bookmarks, and the few actual case reports I can find don’t provide a dosage), but most of the “horse dewormer” stories in the media were just political propaganda.

(The above isn’t getting into the question of whether ivermectin is effective against COVID, though. I think it was reasonable to think so back during the start of the pandemic, since the studies were really quite suggestive, and it was a safe drug to try, and the studies weren’t even debunked at the end - rather, it was found that the improvements were most likely due to the drug treating the coincidental parasite infestations the patients had. It’s not so reasonable now that we have better studies and real working anti-COVID drugs, and the people who suggest taking ivermectin for COVID nowadays sure are crazies, but I personally would not shame people for doing it back in 2021 or so. Taking one of the only drugs that seemed to be effective against a terrifying pandemic is just a smart thing to do, if it’s this safe.)

For jobs behind the camera, there are something like, only 13% of women employed in the film industry.

That doesn’t necessarily imply sexism at all, note. If it turns out women are just 6 times less likely than men to want to have these jobs, then this percentage would be 13% in a perfect non-sexist world. (Though 13% is concerningly low; the percentage of women that go into computer science is around 20-25% and that’s one of the strongest effects. Plausibly the remaining 1.5-2x difference here is due to sexism; I can buy filmmaking being one of the most sexist industries).

I wouldn’t generally require people to “compile their findings into a report”, but in this case the messages are weirdly devoid of any checkable information and then the reddit user in question mysteriously lost a laptop full of findings, so, yeah, these claims are not compelling. I don’t think the reverse engineer in question was lying, per se, but I do think they were very wrong at first by random chance, the story gained traction, and then they were too embarrassed to admit they fucked up.

Really? This is the opposite of my experience with (distil-)whisper - I use it to generate subtitles for stuff like podcasts and was stunned at first by how high-quality the results are. I typically use distil-whisper/distil-large-v3, locally. Was it among the models you tried?

What’s so hilarious about it?

This post is currently top-1 when sorting by controversial. Objectively amazing bait.