I did nothing and I’m all out of ideas!
Nitro is just a marketing term for their high end models, they usually have the Pulse which is the base and the Nitro(+) that has additional features like removable fans.
They cost more but they tend to have a better build quality, but the chip inside is the same.
AMD. Sapphire. Nitro.
The (IMHO) important bits:
TLDR:
Our continuous internal reviews and beta test groups have highlighted areas that we need to focus on more, mainly performance and content
From the FAQ:
Is the game canceled?
No, the game is not canceled.
What happens to pre-orders?
All pre-orders will be refunded in the upcoming weeks. The option to pre-order the game will be removed and the bonus will instead be added to the base game for all
Is there going to be Early Access or Beta Access to the game?
There will not be an early access or extra beta access right now
In the blog there are the steps to how to get the refunds, I’m not copying them in case they change.
As they say, A Delayed Game Is Eventually Good, But a Bad Game Is Bad Forever /s?
Just out of curiosity, is the mouse bluetooth?
I heard there are some intermittent problems with them on linux because of proprietary blobs and similar driver issues, but I’ve never had one, so I’ve no direct experience.
On the contrary, in my opinion if they are clearly labelled as a joke, they are a great way for people who don’t understand them to ask why and, in the process, being a little more informed on what not to do and what it’s dangerous.
Especially because there’s really no risk of emulation in this case.
I feel there’s some kind of miscommunication going on here.
Probably I’m not understanding what you are putting forward, but to be clear: They are not doing this because they want to. They are doing it because they are forced to do it by the DMA.
It’s true that allegedly they were working on some kind of interoperability layer already. For years now. But no evidence of it being more than lip service to avoid being regulated has ever surfaced - as far as I know.
Which would have been in line with your “Do Nothing”.
as an unwilling Whatsapp user the ability to migrate without having to convince all my social circles to do anything but check a checkbox sounds like a huge step forward.
That’s the point. I feel it will not be a “simple checkbox”, and they will make it the most obnoxious process they can using the Best Dark Patterns the industry has to offer.
Already the general public is not interested in the alternatives or the concept of interoperability - wanting something that Just Works™ - putting in front even the smallest step (and some scary text!) will make the percentage of willing people become even lower.
And that’s not all. As it is portraited in the article by the Threema’s spokeperson it is pretty clear that Meta will just try to make the maintenance of the communication layer as cumbersome as they can - both technically and bureaucratically.
They are explicitly the ones keeping the reins of the standard, the features, the security model, the exchanged data and who, how and when will be approved.
So from one side if they make it hard and scary enough to tank the use rate, they will have the excuse of not being there enough people to give priority to fix it or add features, and from the other side if maintaining the interoperability will be difficult and time consuming enough, the people and businesses from the alternatives or wrappers will not have the incentive to do or keep doing it for the long haul. As we can already see in the article.
Is it better than nothing? Sure, probably. Will it be a slow cooking, easy to break, easy to get excluded from, just bare minimum to comply to the letter but not the spirit of the law? I feel that’s a pretty good bet to make.
Let’s be clear: I will be extremely happy if all the red flags and warning bells that I saw in the article will just end up being figments of my imagination. But yes, I’m very pessimistic - maybe even too much - when I see these kind of corporate speech and keywords.
“One of the core requirements here, and this is really important, is for users for this to be opt-in,” says Brouwer. “I can choose whether or not I want to participate in being open to exchanging messages with third parties. This is important, because it could be a big source of spam and scams.”
Let me translate this for you: "We will make users hop on the most cumbersome, frustrating and inefficient way we can think of to enable interoperability. And making it defaulted to off will mean people using other apps will need to find other channels to ask for it to be enabled on our users’ end, making it worthless.
And don’t forget: we will put a bunch of scary warnings, and only allow to go all in, with no middle ground or granularity!"
Great stuff, thank you. I can’t wait.
“We don’t believe interop chats and WhatsApp chats can evolve at the same pace,” he says, claiming it is “harder to evolve an open network” compared to a closed one.
Ah, so they are going for the Apple’s approach with iMessage and Android sms. Cool, cool.
I hope my corporate-to-common translator is broken, because this does just sound bad.
Any foundation model is trained on a subset of common crawl.
All the data in there is, arguably, copyrighted by one individual or another. There is no equivalent open - or closed - source dataset to it.
Each single post, page, blog, site, has a copyright holder. In the last year big companies have started to change their TOS to make that they are able to use, relicense and generally sell your data hosted in their services as their own for the intent of AI training, so potentially some small parts of common crawl will be licensable in bulk - or directly obtained from the source.
This does still leave out the majority of the data directly or indirectly used today, even if you were willing to pay, because it is unfeasable to search and contract every single rights holder.
On the other side of it there have been work to use less but more heavily curated data, which could potentially generate good small, domain specific, models. But still they will not be like the ones we currently have, and the open source community will not be able to have access to the same amount and quality of data.
It’s an interesting problem that I’m personally really interested to see where it leads.
Give technitium a go, my woes diminished drastically with that.
I have a Boox Nova Air which is still going strong after around 2 years, and honestly it’s pretty good for writing. But I heard a lot of people having problems with updates bricking the device or receiving a bad unit and having an hard time returning it, if bought directly from them. I did not have to talk with support and I avoided the updates, so I can’t say more about that. My experience is overall good with it.
I also have a Kobo Libra H2O that I think is nearing the 4 years mark, and is still going really strong. The biggest problem I had was that it asks for a kobo account during setup, thing that I really dislike. I don’t know if it is still like that.
But, generally, if you want an epub compatible reader that you can mod (NickelMenu etc) and easily side load stuff to, with a kobo libra you can’t go wrong. Even if, to be fair, I’m not up to date with the latest devices and company policies.
One note: the kindle format is pretty closed and all the stuff you buy from amazon is generally DRMed to hell, so it’s not certain that you can pass it to other readers. Just avoid amazon’s ebooks.
EDIT: One thing I missed: PDFs on the default kobo software are bad, the Boox default software for PDF is far better and - in my case - there’s a screen size difference too that can make my opinion biased. Aside from that for pure book reading kobo is generally better, but you need to buy a protective case for it: there are a lot of cheap and good quality compatible ones.
I hate that I’m linking to Reddit, but I’m just reminded of this.
OT, but remember you can always use an archived link instead of a live one.
It seems it was done to marginally improve serde_derive build times? And just on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu?
It feels a pretty weird course of action, even if I can understand his point of view his official stance of “My way or the highway” seems a bit stronger than needed, especially considering the amount of problems - both moral and pratical - this modification arises.
I don’t know. If he really feel so strongly about it the only real option would be an hard fork, but a project of that magnitudo and so integrated in the ecosystem is really not easy to both manage or substitute.
Overall it kind of leave a sour taste, even if - I repeat - I understand it is his time and his decision to make.
There’s an archived snapshot of the issue: https://web.archive.org/web/20220623132457/https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/820
I checked on their profile and indeed there is no veilidchat or similar repository.
Using the site search with duckduckgo it gives the same link that goes nowhere, so probably there was a repo but it got taken down? I’ve no idea.
I kinda think Ivan is a random name
Hahahaha, that would be even better!
This is funny. In the email he wrote that the only way to contact the pullpush team is to do so using the forum and, at the same time, he added a really weird ToS agreement where if you are affiliated to Reddit in any way you set that the only possible arbitration of all the disputes need to pass through, I assume, him as a judge.
I’m both impressed and weirded out. Kudos for the creativity.
Are you talking about this: https://lemmyverse.net/communities ?
There’s this one too: https://browse.feddit.de/ but it is not as nice.
I’ve posted a top level comment with all the concepts I think could be useful to better understand the whole Fediverse and Lemmy thing: if ,after that, you have any more questions you can reply to it and I’ll try to help you out.
I’d link it directly but currently comments links can get messy.
This is getting weird.
If I would generate an image with an AI and then take a photo of it, I could copyright the photo, even if the underlying art is not copyrightable, just like the leaves?
So, in an hypothetical way, I could hold a copyright on the photo of the image, but not on the image itself.
So if someone would find the model, seed, inference engine and prompt they could theoretically redo the image and use it, but until then they would be unable to use my photo for it?
So I would have a copyright to it through obscurity, trying to make it unfeasible to replicate?
This does sound bananas, which - to be fair - is pretty in line with my general impression of copyright laws.