If they can target the underlying architecture of the models like nightshade does, it will actually be quite hard to deal with for the surveillance companies.

Datas is correct if you are referring to multiple distinct populations of data. Which in this case works.

afaik no known cases

Did you actually look?

Sibling in existence I know asbestos must be airborne. You aren’t refuting anything by repeatedly saying that. Respond to the words I am saying or I can only assume you are copy pasting talking points.

It’s extremely easy to disturb asbestos, it does not take a large chronic exposure to get health consequences, it takes a very small amount of acute exposure or even less chronic exposure. Generally you will be fine from incidental one-off exposures, but if you live in a home with say, asbestos tiles in your kitchen, or asbestos in the paint or drywall, it can be very easy to build exposure from reno or damage from normal home wear. Not to mention it’s extremely expensive to modify because of the required controls, meaning it disproportionately effects low income households, who both struggle to afford preventative maintenance, and struggle to afford the reno.

There’s a reason asbestos ppe is decon controls roughly equivalent to mercury, lead, and beryllium.

Asbestos is not harmless to people living with it, all structures need repair and modification eventually (regularly) and unknown asbestos cutting or chipping can be incredibly hazardous.

Engineers of the past had very limited design knowledge, so generally subscribed to the “I don’t know how to do this. Oh well, more good, morer bettererer.”

Need is directly in opposition to please. This makes your addition an ironic use of please, and not a polite one, which actually fits the ops observation better than the initial comment did.

Because why solve trivial coding problem when experimental bad technology that won’t even work after a many fold increase in implementation time do trick?

As we all know, ai are the best and only solution to complex tasks such as rudimentary file management.

No AI are to this level, are a massive security risk, and none are “smart”.

pay if it’s worth it

It isn’t.

Honestly I was expecting far more downvotes. I posted the video with people like you in mind, who still can think critically are marks without the burden of misinformation and ideology. not being marks.

Ftfy

By the way, if you think you are not subject to ideology, I have several things to sell you.

For anyone else reading: everyone is subject to ideology. The moment you think you arent, that is when you are most trapped by it.

Body weight exercises can build plenty of muscle. You only need specialized muscle targeting once you’re body building. For health body weight exercises are ideal, targeting individual muscles is not as useful to fitness as training many muscles in tandem for common movements.

They just smell nice, your skin is dead and you’re not retrieving anything from it. Just eat the fruits and veggies.

All you really need is the Nyquist frequency of human hearing to know. That’s a good breakdown for audiophiles I’m sure but it is broadly as simple as the Nyquist frequency.

I mean I disagree about not sympathizing with folks somewhat trapped in a hostile software ecosystem, but surely “stand by your beliefs” is not unheard of.

Yeah I don’t agree with the osd being the only approach to being open source. Turns out people have differing opinions on that. You’re welcome.

It wasn’t a response to my comment because you didn’t respond to my comment. You said is proprietary. I point out that it’s not a terrible license. Then you resort to a sound bite non response.

You could have pointed out for example that ftl 3.2 and 4.1 are pretty shitty limitations to impose.

Ah. Of course. Something being open source doesn’t make it open source. It all makes sense now thank you for clarifying.

That also wasn’t technically a response to my comment, it was an ideological defense mechanism to avoid addressing the content of the license.

This license while not the most permitting does not appear to hide the code behind any proprietary shielding though.

It’s not just the user agent that fingerprints a user.

Hence a good most of the exact comment you responded to.

No it’s a security and fingerprinting tradeoff.

The more your browser acts to hide your behaviors and limit tracking, the more unique your fingerprint is. The most private browser setup is one which appears to be identical to all the other traffic in a non unique way, or noise. This definitionally lacks information for tracking.

Also security flaws and tracking exploits need to be constantly patched.

This is a fundamental tradeoff for privacy. Using more obscure browsers can (not always) then expose you to behavioral fingerprinting because they look different and react to web pages differently.