If you plan to use Gemini, be warned, here are the usual Big Tech dragons:
Please don’t enter ...confidential info or any data... you wouldn’t want a reviewer to see or Google to use ...
The full extract of the terms of usage:
How human reviewers improve Google AI
To help with quality and improve our products (such as the generative machine-learning models that power Gemini Apps), human reviewers (including third parties) read, annotate, and process your Gemini Apps conversations. We take steps to protect your privacy as part of this process. This includes disconnecting your conversations with Gemini Apps from your Google Account before reviewers see or annotate them. Please don’t enter confidential information in your conversations or any data you wouldn’t want a reviewer to see or Google to use to improve our products, services, and machine-learning technologies.
Conversations that have been reviewed or annotated by human reviewers (and related data like your language, device type, location info, or feedback) are not deleted when you delete your Gemini Apps activity because they are kept separately and are not connected to your Google Account. Instead, they are retained for up to three years.
Emphasis on "retained for up to three years" even if you delete it!!
If i'm not wrong, Chatgpt states clearly that they don't use user data anymore by default.
Also, maybe some services are doing "machine learning" training with user data, but it is the first time I see recent LLM service saying that you can feed your data to human reviewers at their will.
You can use a paid tier to avoid such issues. Not sure what you're expecting for those "experimental" models, which is in development and needs user feedback.
What is the context of this exactly? Why Google was forced to do an update that would degrade so much the performances? And would have a new battery solved that or just rendered the situation a little bit less bad?
I have to see the usual "rant" shit post of Musk on X where he defames "judges" for such a case...
Curiously it is just limited to decision going against his choices and his russian friends choices...
Same thing for example for public tv broadcast streams. Often they want you to create an account with an email to watch streams, for totally zéro use for you but they hope to be able to target you with ad and co.
Same thing, I create a random account with random creds each time I want to use it. And there will be zero impact for me if it leaks...
I think that we can easily say that it is a huge "epic fail" for the whole ecosystem of people that pushed for "Passkey" with the argument that "this was more safe than password that need to be deprecated"...
It's worth keeping in mind that if you enter your password in an attacker-controlled website, you lose your entire credential, not just one malicious authentication/signature using it such as here.
Also, this vulnerability is very patchable; password phishing is incredibly hard to prevent.
Although this is an attack that can be carried out in practice, it is not quite as scalable as phishing passwords of potentially millions of users across the world. Passkeys are still in general more phish-proof than passwords.
I flagged this entry because it looks like a marketing stunt.
The description of the book was looking appealing, and I was amazed at the good spirit to have a free downloadable version.
So I opened a new tab for the free and paid versions, because I was curious to see the inside but interested to have a hard-copy.
But then, on one side you arrive on a page that says that the digital copy is "sold out"... lol... sold out. And on the other side, the hardcopy page says that it is not for sell anymore as a new version will arrive and here is a link to "pre order". And the funniest is that this link to nostarch does not even work...
My guess is that the author learned a hard lesson that really only content creators can learn:
If you offer something that is payment optional and on an anonymous basis, 95%+ of people will take it for free. It doesn't matter how virtuous your audience speaks, if you are going to offer something for free and it's not face-to-face, almost no one will pay you.
> I flagged this entry because it looks like a marketing stunt.
He published this version in 2021. He's working on a second edition coming out later this year with No Starch. I suspect he had meant to take down the older PDF a while ago and the surge in interest yesterday from here reminded him it was still up.
Might be that he hasn't actually written the book yet. Once he has enough pre-orders, he can get financing and can hire a ghost writer to write the book.
I'm a huge fan of Kagi, despite the price.
I switched one day when I realized that I couldn't bear anymore Google results that were full of advertisements.
But, I just noticed something crazy:
- I did try the same search as the one that is listed in the article "best headphones for running" in Google.com
Strangely, with my main chrome browser, connected to my google account, there was no advertisement or top banner with products at all for this search.
But, doing a slight variation, like "best headphones for jumping" or "best headphones for walking", then I would have a top banner with some products, kind of discrete advertisement.
But what is crazy, is that if I open a Private browsing session in chrome, or even just my chromium with my same google account connected (not using kagi), doing any of those searches, will lead to the result with a big "advertisement" top banner, where you see some products with price on different merchant accounts like amazon. And including for the search "best headphones for running"!
I also think that a lot of people have no clue about what is free software/open source at its root.
Nothing was said to make money, be rich or avoid someone else (being big companies) becoming rich.
At the origin, the greatness of the concept was that you were free on your own computer to do whatever you wanted, how you wanted it. For yourself. And more particularly, FOSS was allowing anyone to have access to tools and server software that was restricted to companies with very expensive and complicated licenses before that.
See Linux that gave access to an Unix-like OS at a time were it was unreachable to hobbyist.
In my own time, I remember this incredible pleasure of being able to host his own web server with WAMP or LAMP stack, at a time where you were forced to buy and use windows Pro with corporate license IIS to host even a simple website...
Nowadays, the greatness of FOSS is that anyone can still access for free, without string attached, to all the software needed to train and run LLM models.
> See Linux that gave access to an Unix-like OS at a time were it was unreachable to hobbyist.
This is revisionist history. Linux eventually supplanted FreeBSD, which was widely used and popular in the 1990s. FreeBSD was also objectively the better OS back then, a clean and reliable system.
What made Linux successful over the long-term IMO is that they evolved the kernel much faster and earlier than FreeBSD, particularly when it came to hardware scalability and performance, which was advantageous with the progression of Moore’s Law. The cluster-style supercomputers were developed almost entirely on Linux as a result, which created a positive feedback cycle. Second, the Linux user-land quickly became really pleasant to use compared to most other UNIX flavors at the time because they weren’t too concerned with purity or being strictly interoperable with some other UNIX.
Most people in the industry today don’t remember the era of at least a dozen different UNIX-style OS being widely used. I probably used half of them in anger at some point. In that environment Linux won by having a superior UX out of the box for a lot of use cases, even if you paid the absurd money for one of the proprietary UNIX flavors. Later Linux started demonstrating better performance too. FreeBSD was definitely tidier and cleaner with its much slower evolution but sometimes worse is better.
While Linux was technically released a year or two earlier, the contemporaneous versions of FreeBSD were much more mature. Linux was pretty unusable as a production server for the first several years but FreeBSD was more than serviceable.
I used them both almost from the beginning of their existence. Linux was a novelty early on but FreeBSD was serving a lot of the load in Silicon Valley for a big chunk of the 1990s. Linux didn’t really hit its stride until the 2000s. Linux was pretty actively bad early on if you just needed a UNIX server.
We will have to disagree, by 1993 we (University) used it all over the place for production with either Slackware or Debian. Which where rock solid. FreeBSD barely worked around the time, and even with the FreeBSD 2.0 release which nuked a bunch of things due to the whole AT&T mess, people eschewed it like the plauge.
That GNU/Linux hit its stride "in the 2000s" is ... what is revisionism of history here to the point of it being an absurd thing to say.
> Nothing was said to make money, be rich or avoid someone else (being big companies) becoming rich.
Sometimes many people don't realise the value of information is not there in individual blogpost but when you can combine them into a holistic approach. A drop of water by itself is useless, only a body of water becomes useful.
The entire FOSS creed is just giving people permission to create things without the fear of someone coming along and stealing all of their work/art for profit.
Sure, people can come along and make money off of it, but they can't steal it. It's unstealable. Therefore, you're free to create.
Do I understand correctly that this means that browser will have to do yet another useless request to domains or website to know the GPC status in addition with the request required to retrieve the ressources ? In addition with OPTION requests that already have to be done?
reply