The minima at 2009-2010 is absurdly clear though. You undid 20 years of progress in about 10 years. I’m honestly shocked - what happened in 2009 to cause this?

Dumb as fuck EPA emissions standards

But the US Department of Transportation was concerned that smaller vehicles are less safe in the event of an accident, and this department oversees Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. Hence, the agency discouraged manufacturers from reducing vehicle size to meet the standards by ensuring that the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards require higher fuel economy for smaller vehicles than for larger vehicles.

…

Since the adoption of size-based standards in 2012, new vehicles have been getting larger, and sales have shifted from cars to light trucks. Between 2011 and 2022, the average vehicle footprint (roughly, the area defined by the four wheels) increased by about 4 percent, and the share of cars in total sales dropped from about 65 percent to 40 percent. In the GHG standards that EPA proposed in April this year, the agency notes that the increasing size and shift from cars to trucks has increased average emissions rates by about 10 percent.

Hell, I’d love to see them try their hand at an explanation before the AI text vomit. As long as it’s mostly readable, I’d rather it be a bit stilted but honest rather than this crap.

Don’t worry, they’re just two weeks away!

Fuck you botly, I’m going clankertipping

Those of us in the business call that “Patch Tuesday”

Mine has been doing shit like that for close to a year, the graphics driver is sooooo unstable

I wonder if that’s why my work PC has been having all kinds of stuttering/lag issues. I’m regularly seeing a second or two between clicking/typing at various points throughout the day.

Ahahahaha, I really hope someone ate their lunch on this wonderful stock

FYI, the cold boot attack is only viable for a handful of seconds before your memory decays enough for it to be worthless for that attack.

Powering your system down yourself prevents this. Just make sure your system doesn’t have fastboot enabled or hibernates instead of a true power off.

Isn’t that attack only viable within minutes of a machine being powered down?

Not even, try seconds at most.

All things considered, a cold boot attack is only remotely feasible if the system is powered on when the attack begins. If it’s powered off for any length of time, your memory will have decayed past the point of it being usable for the attack.

That might work if the zionazis weren’t actively showing they want to cleanse Palestine so they can move in.

That actually is correct, because if you power your system down ahead of time, this attack is meaningless since there is only a VERY short window where this attack works. From your link:

Attackers execute cold boot attacks by forcefully and abruptly rebooting a target machine and then booting a pre-installed operating system from a USB flash drive, CD-ROM or over the network.

If your attacker only has your cold machine that’s been off since well before you hit the checkpoint, they can’t do shit with that attack. At best they can boot the system up to verify your system operates as intended, but you don’t have to provide any of the credentials to finish booting or unlock the TPM to load the key material into memory.

Rossman posted a video a while ago about how Microsoft updated their site without noting they updated it to gaslight their customers into thinking it’s always said that.

There’s a reason these companies are trying to kill the archive sites, it lets people call them on their bullshit.

Edit: YouTube source

“Don’t believe your lying eyes”

Nor should the library do something!

They should and are doing something about it, because libraries are being flooded with digital slop books that they end up having to pay the distributor for when a patron checks it out.

404Media had some stories last year I think where librarians were removing books from the catalog to save money for real authors and to cut down on the number of complaints received about the obvious slop the books contained.

Yeah, then they have to limit the entrance to the school, add wait times to get in because of processing, and it gives a convenient mass of students for wannabe shooters

He’s VERY soft on crime, implementing cashless bail for many offenses.

Whoops, looks like you put a good thing in you list of bad things.

Fuck the prison industrial system, and the poor tax that is bail.

That makes more sense, thanks for expanding on your point.

Like I said, I mainly take issue with describing it as ‘understanding’ due to the connotations it gives off. I’m used to AI glazers using the same wordings and actually try to make the argument there is an understanding behind the statistical probabilities.

My point is that saying an LLM understands anything is anthropomorphizing the LLM and leads people into thought patterns that give it an inordinate amount of authority because people equate the simulacrum of understanding/comprehension with actual understanding.

I think we just fundamentally disagree on the concept of llms a being able to understand a topic rather than it being a shallow statistical prediction if the correct answer, and I just can’t equate understanding with statistical predictions. The fact that the underlying math is able to generalize the prediction in novel ways lends weight to the misbelief that it understands concepts, but the decoherence that happens over long conversations should shatter the illusion.

Who has enough money and is motivated to wage a faux grass roots campaign to kill AI data centers?

AI scammers are using AI to generate anti-datacenter slop. Because they get money from engagement. - 404media

But the cast majority of the backlash is more organic than not, since they’re just jumping on the bandwagon

I don’t see it.

Cuz you’re looking at the wrong side of the money