I listened to some of the “music.” I’m not sure wtf is going on in his head at this point, and I’m glad I don’t understand.

The biggest risk in terms of human extinction is a government allowing an AI to make unchecked military (e.g. nuclear) decisions.

Among them, “entering houses without permission to use the bathroom,” “break-ins,” “littering,” and people “defecating in private yards” and “complaining when residents catch them.”

I really don’t understand how a tourist can think any of this makes sense. Like, would they do this in their country too?

Matrix is fragmented too, but it’s generally less fragmented in my experience (if you use a relatively well developed client). Part of this is because most people just use Synapse for their server. With XMPP, server implementations support random combinations of XEPs, and specific servers often are missing random XEPs because they’re not enabled by default and so on (thinking about ejabberd for instance here, the default config probably isn’t what most people want). I also routinely have random compatibility problems between clients pop up with XMPP. As a basic example, retracting messages is very haphazard.

Anyway, yeah, if they standardize on server and client setup for all govt instances, it’d be fine either way probably. The clients may be somewhat janky, but they can probably fix those issues more easily when they’re only focused on one client (although unless it’s like FluffyChat and cross-platform, they may need to standardize multiple clients) and server.

I think there have been some attempts to do so, but they’re just not good enough (and/or end up dead after a while).

The biggest problem with XMPP is what various servers and clients implement is kind of all over the place. For instance, most clients support an older version of OMEMO, but some clients support newer versions, and the different versions are incompatible.

The other issue is some platforms (iOS in particular) have pretty shitty XMPP apps filled with bugs.

I still generally like XMPP more than Matrix since ATM Matrix clients are also filled with bugs/laggy, Synapse (the main server implementation) is very resource heavy, and message syncing is kind of shit if the client doesn’t implement sliding sync (like FluffyChat). I personally think the UI for both XMPP and Matrix clients generally kind of suck, which isn’t great for convincing non-techy people to use them.

Except it is still encrypted to the intended recipient. As the other commenter said, WhatsApp is just another “member” of the group that you can’t see. Basically all they’d have to do is have a server somewhere functioning as a WhatsApp client. Your client sends the message to your intended recipient. It also then sends the message to their “client.” The routing server for the messages can’t decrypt the messages. All the messages are still encrypted per-member of the group and can’t be decrypted until it hits the ends, but WhatsApp is basically a mole siphoning all your messages and storing them.

Obviously it’s deceptive. But if you individually encrypt the messages you’re sending, the one you send to the receiver still can’t be decrypted by Meta, only the copy sent directly to Meta can, so the copy sent to your intended receiver is still “E2EE.”

So, is it basically treating every message as a “group” message where it sends it to some system WhatsApp account and then also to your intended receiver? This is what I’m assuming based on them supposedly being able to see deleted messages. Also would let them say it’s technically still “E2EE” since it’s indeed E2EE to your receiver, but it’s also E2EE to them as well.

If this were true (which is nearly impossible since you said “all”), stuff like Anubis wouldn’t exist since you could just toss up a crowd-sourced robots.txt and be done with it.

This issue is largely manifesting through AI scraping right now. Additionally, many intentionally ignore robots.txt. Currently, LLM scrapers are basically just bad actors on the internet. Courts have also ruled in favor of a number of AI companies when sued in the US, so it’s unlikely anything will change. Effectively, if you don’t like the status quo, stuff like this is one of your few options.

This isn’t even mentioning of course whether we actually want these companies to improve their models before resolving the problems of energy consumption and potential displacement of human workers.

Corporations want the existing copyright system for their own products but simultaneously want to freely scrape data from everyone else.

I mean, they say earlier that music is actually well-preserved, but it’s disproportionately popular music. If the goal is then to preserve everything, I’d expect them to go for stuff that isn’t likely to be in some random audiophile’s collection or whatever then.

1. Over-focus on the most popular artists. There is a long tail of music which only gets preserved when a single person cares enough to share it. And such files are often poorly seeded.

• We primarily used Spotify’s “popularity” metric to prioritize tracks. View the top 10,000 most popular songs in this HTML file (13.8MB gzipped).
• For popularity>0, we got close to all tracks on the platform. The quality is the original OGG Vorbis at 160kbit/s. Metadata was added without reencoding the audio (and an archive of diff files is available to reconstruct the original files from Spotify, as well as a metadata file with original hashes and checksums).
• For popularity=0, we got files representing about half the number of listens (either original or a copy with the same ISRC). The audio is reencoded to OGG Opus at 75kbit/s — sounding the same to most people, but noticeable to an expert.

Perhaps I’m reading this wrong, but is this not a little backwards? Since unpopular music is poorly preserved, shouldn’t the focus be on getting the least popular music first?

You’re triggering my PTSD from the weekly cross-team meetings I’m forced to attend.

Good luck I guess. Looking it up briefly gives US families having $1+ million net worth being in the 80th or 90th percentile (depending on the source), so somewhere between 1/5 and 1/10 families.

Are you talking about people with like 10s or 100s of millions or are you including people with just 1 million? In a number of places, you basically cannot easily buy a house without something approaching 1 million (which is a problem itself).

Also, I’ve seen this statement here several times now. Where is the line? 1 million is a pretty arbitrary value, so how many thousands is too much?

Interesting username.

Pretty sure it was assumed he might be in them, but it only became extremely obvious that something potentially damning was in them when he started fighting it so hard despite saying he’d release them before getting elected.

But if you mean in general, then yeah, for sure lol.

Difference is compiling an app from source for Android is not really feasible on Android devices, whereas doing so on macOS is literally built into the package managers for macOS and is generally pretty trivial beyond it taking more time.

Also, macOS doesn’t prevent you from running the apps entirely.