I mean wait, kind of the quiet but most interesting part of this:
One of the lawsuits names 4chan and X as defendants, *alleging that they allowed bad actors to spread users' personal information*.
It might be the most ironic lawsuit ever. How many people can turn around and sue . . . Tea . . . *alleging that they allowed bad actors to spread users' personal information*.
This is truly the most ridiculous timeline.
This is the problem that doesn't get brought up nearly enough. They all act like they have some huge moat and will eventually dominate some huge market, but it doesn't seem like they will. They don't have some intellectual property portfolio like Microsoft, or some opportunity to make GPT a monopoly like Windows. None of their brands have any value, they're all so easily replaced. You can run a successful business at a huge loss for years if you have some way to make it hard for your customers to leave you when you start enshiffifying things on them. None of the AI companies seem to have that.
"GPT" will almost certainly never be a verb like Google. Somehow the hype train rolled right past the Deepseek scare but it . . . shouldn't have.
I'm old. I consume all kinds of content at variable speed depending on how interested I am in it and what I need out of it.
Because I'm *reading* it.
More and more young people *only* listen to and watch videos. You skim some articles? They're doing the same thing, but reading less.
The other factor is, especially on YouTube, videos are garbage. The algorithm/ad model rewards length. There's lots of really interesting, informative stuff on YouTube, but dragged out to an hour for five minute content. It's going to make AI summaries seem way more useful than they should be to the same crowd.
It's already night and day using a Linux desktop with regard to how vendors support it from a few years ago. Not that long ago, expecting things like Netflix and Spotify to work was out of the question, now you can pretty much assume they are all aware of and support Linux.
More and more hardware vendors, peripheral makers, are contributing their own support, directly to the kernel. I bought a PS5 controller a few years ago but no PS5, because I saw Sony had contributed the drivers directly to the kernel, and they work great. It seems extremely likely that in another 2-3 years, it will surpass 10%. At that point, you'll really be able to expect to go and say, buy a mouse or a monitor or some USB speakers, and have the hardware manufacturer be paying attention to Linux. At that point, I don't really care what the market share is, but normal people can have a big tech alternative without a lot of hoops to jump through, and that's a good thing.
It's hard not to think the surge in Linux desktop users wasn't a big factor in this.
Weird times.
https://jangernert.gitlab.io/b...
NewsFlash is excellent if you're a GNOME user, or probably even if you aren't.
Use it every day.
Yeah. I mean a few weeks ago on github, I accidentally clicked the preconfigured "generate me a Pong game" prompt and played around with it for all of ten minutes.
So I mean, technically I've tried Copilot . . .
And it was alright, pretty cool even, but come on. It's not as if I was flocking to it, they put it in front of everyone on Github, a thing they bought.
For sure, but it's definitely just part of it. They break down the hardware and distros used. SteamOS is a bit under 30%.
The momentum is undeniable. At this rate it could pretty easily break 10% in 3-5 years. It's already having a lot of subtle but important effects. Peripheral makers like 8bitdo, Hori, and even Sony, are all supporting Linux all of a sudden. Tons of game publishers are too.
Oh yeah, it absolutely played a big part. This timeline of 2FA even has a special section about it:
https://www.newamerica.org/in-...
Basically Apple had to scramble, to both insist that their systems were not hacked, but also that they were doing something about it. So they finally started pushing 2FA, and where Apple goes, the industry goes.
There's a cyber security angle to this story that I don't think is getting talked about nearly enough.
I think it was the Target breach a few years ago, where a huge number of non-techie people just stopped caring about data breaches. They gave up "I just assume my data is out there anyways" and the like became a normal line.
But with this . . . people are going to get mad. The "fappening" moved the needle. In about a year suddenly every big company adopted 2FA. Will this finally make the US adopt some serious data protection rules? Will the class action against Tea that's likely coming actually drive them out of business?
Big precedent setting events are likely on the way.
Stack Exchange is shrinking rapidly and has no idea when the bleeding will stop.
I imagine they needed to buy new hardware, and that investment makes a lot less sense if you expect *less* traffic next year, not more.
The generic spin about not having to go to the data center is serious cope in context.
The reading between the lines here, is that with traffic down 80%+, they aren't saving money running their own stuff anymore. I'm sure the reality is, refreshing old hardware that they would buy, doesn't make sense when they have no expectation the bleeding will stop. So cloud.
The spin about "no one having to drive to the data center" like its AWS marketing from 2015 feels like some serious cope in context.
Read the actual article, what they did, was tune a system to get the best results possible from ~80 case studies based on rules they devised for success.
That is not, even a little, the same as having it evaluate patients.
These articles are just exhausting. The tech is cool, but no, they don't have an 80% accuracy in diagnosing patients compared to a doctor's 20%.
Yeah. And that "random" podcast includes experts in the field explaining this in detail.
Even if it's just some AC, it scares me how dismissive people are of actual science now. They've found something to panic about, and by god, they're sticking to it.
What you said is exactly what they go into. Because labs have so much plastic in them, and the procedures that measure them require burning that can break other chemicals down into things that look very much like plastic, plenty of studies have been off by literally many orders of magnitude.
Basically all actual experts say yeah, wait for someone to replicated it, the single study, should not be a headline outside of the circles of actual experts.
Microplastic studies have been so wrong so many times, I just can't muster the freakout until other people replicate the results.
How many hardware guys does it take to change a light bulb? "Well the diagnostics say it's fine buddy, so it's a software problem."
