

I wonder what the results would have looked like if they added questions to see the difference in acceptance between banning smartphones vs banning dumb phones.


I wonder what the results would have looked like if they added questions to see the difference in acceptance between banning smartphones vs banning dumb phones.


Granular privacy controls for profile sharing
That said, there is one noticeable new feature for users: easier profile sharing. This feature allows users to share their name and image from existing profiles such as their Google, Apple or operator accounts in a conversation, ensuring that parties in a conversation become easier to identify, particularly in group settings. In keeping with RCS’s focus on ensuring their privacy, users will be able to control who can receive that information.
Looks like iOS devices just recently started supporting E2EE between android and iOS (as long as iOS users have updated to iOS 26.5 and android users are on the latest version of Google Messages).
I’m hoping this means that we’ll start to see other messaging clients supporting RCS besides Google Messages.
The dislikes were great at telling me quickly if a tutorial was good or not.
Now you generally have to check the top comments to see if there’s something wrong about the tutorial, but then YouTube started hiding those comments below ads/recommendations.
Now I just use GrayJay and I can quickly check comments for any video.


By taking on the meme generator, Saflor may hit a wall if the court finds that his arguments apply to any meme generator and a finding in his favor could risk undercutting the entire meme ecosystem, Goldman said.
This will definitely be an interesting case to watch unfold. In my opinion it could definitely be a win if websites that run any kind of meme generator are forced to pay the official artist to have their template on their site.


This doesn’t really seem fitting to this sub, but I guess this is tech related news because they have multiple websites?


In most countries, the output of a single prompt will not be copyrightable. However, once someone starts arranging the output into something more, then copyright can be applied.
Overall, it depends on the country, but in some they are asking their legislators for clarification. Many are trying to apply pre-existing copyright laws to LLMs.
The U.S. Copyright Office wrote up a report about this and included a list of how other countries are handling it.
https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf


You really should know by now how scrutinous people are about AI anything.
Well, we are on the Fediverse here where there’s a very loud echo chamber of anti-AI sentiment. Outside of this bubble, there’s a loud minority that’s anti-AI, but the vast majority of end users are more neutral on the subject.


For any AI Translations, it’s good practice to open up a different chat with the model, and have it translate the output back to your original language so that you can double check what is being said.


knowingly, intentionally continue to fund neo-Nazis in Sweden.
Am I understanding you correctly that you’re accusing anyone who continues to use Mullvad as someone who supports neo-Nazis in Sweden?


Edit: I was thinking of the default defederation list
As far as I understand it, it’s not “hardcoded” in the sense that all piefed instances have it (otherwise I wouldn’t be able to respond to you).
From what I understand, there is a default list, but this can be edited by any instance admins.


Yeah, it happens. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I probably could have been more helpful by listing out some specific features, so I went back and edited them in.


Looks like someone is already asking them for clarification in this thread here: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/2929
Maybe the banner will be updated to more closely match what Defnulls said. Unless that banner changes it’s certainly not a stretch to say that “Cryptocurrency projects are no longer allowed.”


It’s similar to Lemmy, but with more features and has better integration with Mastodon.
- Edit -
Some specific features that PieFed has:


If that’s supposed to be the correct interpretation, why does the top of the site now state, “Cryptocurrency projects are no longer allowed. View change”?



I’m wondering if there’s some grace period for projects to migrate, or if they just start locking projects down immediately after their community votes to ban something.


It’s a little hard to argue that when the top of the site now says, “Cryptocurrency projects are no longer allowed. View change”.



For “AI editing”, I don’t have much of a problem if a model was trained to tweak the settings in something like Darktable to achieve a good baseline to start with. However, for contributing to research like this, I draw the line when models start generating their own pixels and overwriting the original image.
Hopefully iNaturalist and other similar groups start to look at the metadata of submitted images to help warn/educate end users about this problem. That would at least help with the AI literacy issue. Those metadata tags are already being placed there by the most popularly used tools.


A lot of users here seem to be under the misconception that these are 100% AI generated images.
The problem isn’t really with that as the article states that this is an issue with using AI in the editing process:
Outright hoaxes remain rare and are often easy to spot, said Lees – nobody is falling for a toucan sighting in Siberia – but he says birders often use AI to edit and improve an image, and the algorithm can then introduce parts from different bird species to create the new image.
It’s also worth noting that some phones allow you to zoom in beyond your camera’s normal capabilities by using AI to enhance the picture. With some algorithms this might not be an issue, but if it’s using a model that’s been trained by some animal/object database then this can introduce innaccuracies that would cause problems for researchers trying to keep their database clean.
From reading the article and watching the video, it didn’t sound like they were refusing the option of having a union. It was more that they wanted to have an official vote on the matter, and didn’t want to be pressured into a decision on the spot: