Well that is my argument, we hit diminishing returns this generation, and further upgrades are a waste of money.

If you have anything relevant to add, it’s certainly welcome, but ignoring context to try to make my point sound worse is just wasting both our time.

I’m confused why you seem like you’re arguing with me but still fundamentally making the same point. Those improvements don’t inherently make games more fun, but they create opportunities for variety and new elements to the medium. It was previous tech improvements that made Halo and F.E.A.R. possible, that’s exactly what I’m talking about.

But processing power isn’t really a relevant limitation to game design anymore. I genuinely don’t see any future console generations being particularly enticing for me, outside an upgrade to my steam deck, especially when most of what I play is 5-20 years old anyway.

I have to assume you’re too young to remember previous generations.

Increased power makes a difference up to a point, but we’re now so far into diminishing returns you can hardly tell the difference between a ps4 game and the ps5 ‘enhanced’ if you don’t have a 4k TV.

Increased computing power used to open up entirely new concepts in gaming. 3D environments, then larger and larger worlds, dynamic physics engines, more complex NPC Ai and more power to run larger numbers of enemies at a time.

Now, it hardly matters. There’s more than enough power to do pretty much anything you want. Unlimited worlds, thousands of NPCs, photorealistic graphics, and absolutely nothing new. It can always be ‘bigger and better’ but at what point does that stop mattering? For me, it was last console generation.

Nah, better lighting doesn’t do a damn thing to make a game more fun. The only notable difference that even matters is better load times.

She’s an elected leader for the unified Maori tribes, a largely ceremonial role whose primary purpose is to protect Maori interests against government overreach.

But go ahead and latch onto the name I guess.

Thanks for the info! I guess that’s ultimately what I’m looking for more about: how much do we know about cellular traffic? Obviously with encryption we can’t just directly read cell signals to find out what’s being sent, so do people just record the volume of data being sent in individual packets and make educated guesses?

It seems plausible to run a simple(non-AI) algorithm to isolate probable conversations and send stripped and compressed audio chunks along with normal data. I assume that’s still probably too hard to hide, but if anyone out there knows of someone that’s looked for this stuff, I’d love to check it out.

It’s almost like they were asking about sources for people looking or something.

If you’re not going to contribute, why are you wasting people’s time?

It’s a reasonable explanation, and what I typically assume to be true. Still, I’m curious about the actual mechanics, and if it potentially could be being done by Google without the larger tech industry being aware of it.

That makes sense, but isn’t it assuming they’re processing data on the device? I would expect them to send raw audio back to be processed by Google ad services. Obviously it wouldn’t work without signal either, but that’s hardly a limitation.

As someone else pointed out, how does the google song recognition work? That’s active without triggering the light indicating audio recording, and is at least processing enough audio data to identify songs.

As someone relatively ignorant about the mechanics of something like this, would it not make more sense that the app would be getting this data from the Android OS, with Google’s knowledge and cooperation?

The place I see the most unsettling ads (that seem to be driven by overheard conversation) tends to be the google feed itself, so it seems reasonable to me that they could be using and selling that information to others as well, and merely disguising how the data were acquired.

Just a heads up, catbox.moe is starting to get blocked by some major ISPs. Verizon is one I’ve run into, catbox links won’t load if I’m using the mobile network.

deleted by creator

Thanks for clarifying, now please refer to the poster’s original statement:

AI doesn’t grok anything. It doesn’t have any capability of understanding at all. It’s a Markov chain on steroids.

Why would you need a male/female USB?

This device is basically just a really short charging/data cable. I don’t understand what’s so confusing about it. It’s functionally identical to using the standard charging cable, just with the devices closer together.

The majority of the current ‘democrat’ party in the US are Neoliberals. Yeah it’s a right wing ideology, that’s the whole point of recognizing that even the ‘left wing’ here are still primarily conservatives.

Obviously, most of Mega’s traffic is piracy, they have no interest in doing that. The point is it’s an actual comparison instead of the nonsense you brought up.

Of course no individual site is going to singlehandedly stop criminal acts. Glad you agree it would be exactly as effective as I suggested.

I mean, I know Google has been shitty lately, but Wikipedia isn’t hard to find: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterrence_(penology)

I’d wager Nintendo has put some fear into a few folks considering developing emulators, but that’s the only comparison to be made here. The lack of any real consequences for individuals downloading roms is why so many are happy to publicly proclaim their piracy.

Now, I bet if megaupload added an AI that checked users uploads for copyrighted titles and gave everyone trying to upload them a warning about possible jail time, we’d see a hell of a lot less roms and movies on mega.

But having that tracking shown to you has a very powerful psychological effect.

It’s pretty well established that increasing penalties for crimes does next to nothing to prevent those crimes. But what does reduce crime rates is showing how people were caught for crimes, making people believe that they are less likely to ‘get away with it’.

Being confronted with your own searches is an immediate reminder that the searcher is doing something illegal, and that they are not doing so unnoticed. That’s wildly different than abstractly knowing that you’re probably being tracked somewhere by somebody among billions of other people.

If everywhere you go smells like shit…

I get where you’re coming from, and it would be great if it was at all possible to reliably identify internet sarcasm, but at this point the waters are so muddy it’s impossible to tell. I have absolutely no faith in anyone online at this point, and most of us are here in the Fediverse specifically because we’re so sick of the crazies all over other social media. I can easily believe there are people that would share exactly what you typed above and mean it.

Frankly, sarcasm is already the laziest, most braindead form of humor anyway. If you can’t even be bothered to at least make it clear you’re joking, it’s really a ‘you’ problem if you get misunderstood.

“Most of the time, when people ask me a question, it’s the wrong question and they just didn’t know to ask a different question instead.”

“I’ve tried asking ChatGPT “How do I get the relative path from a string that might be either an absolute URI or a relative path?” It spat out 15 lines of code for doing it manually. I ain’t gonna throw that maintenance burden into my codebase. So I clarified: “I want a library that does this in a single line.” And it found one.”

You see the irony right? I genuinely can’t fathom your intent when telling this story, but it is an absolutely stellar example.

You can’t give a good answer when people don’t ask the right questions. ChatGPT answers are only as good as the prompts. As far as being a “plagiarizing, shameless bullshitter of a monkey paw” I still don’t think it’s all that different from the results you get from people. If you ask a coworker the same question you asked chatGPT, you’re probably going to get a line copied from a Google search that may or may not work.