Hi I’m a human, maybe a furry, not an AI. Also ‘‘venia_sil’’ on Fedia.

Sometimes my posts are licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Contact if looking for a licensing deal.

Website? Website.

  • 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2025

help-circle
  • Maybe instead of removing the RCE, we can lock down the sandbox better and reduce the amount of information advertisers can collect.

    By all means but then someone do it, because it’s 2025 and even Firefox sends all this information that is absolutely not needed to show a webpage. It’s at least 25 years late by this point.

    If you remove code execution in the browser, then many websites will need to ship desktop apps instead.

    Which in quite more than just some cases would be good, precisely because some things should be native programs instead of requiring that the web browser basically provides all the tasks of the OS.











  • Has both a piracy and a privacy community, which is nice and probably leads to fun mishaps / mistypings. It’s pretty lean to federate to and fro as well, same with the UI.

    Just about the only negative I can consider is their position pro AI, but I can live with that, the world is pretty close to the end anyway.


  • Venia Silente@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoFediverse@lemmy.worldlemm.ee dead
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago
    1. No. There is no particular reason why there needs to be one (say) twitter alternative. Heck, there is not even a reason why there should be a alternative. Fediverse is allowed to be their own things.
    2. But each site already has their front page. See eg.: lemmy.dbzer0.com. Alternatively if you meant “each software”, that’s more-or-less what join-lemmy.org is doing.
    3. No but yes.
    4. I’m not sure that leads to where you think it leads to. That would require authenticating users financially, for one, else it becomes a dark pattern magnet for suckpuppeting.
    5. Mostly absolutely yes. I think I’ve seen it discussed a few times under “fediverse identity” or something like that.






  • The latter part makes sense to me tbh. Machines should not allowed to compete with humans (in creative endeavours) because it is an intrinsically unfair competition that further erodes the rights of those humans who are more vulnerable, in the circumstance that is opposite to the intent of having machines around in the first place. They are supposed to do our beast-of-burden work, not make it so that our only pending value to be extracted by capitalism is beast-of-burden work.

    What I’m not sure I buy is the idea that the “countless works” generated by AI actually compete with the original, in particular if they are non-infringing. Let’s say I take the work of an author to train an AI on their style. The author writes exclusively noir; I instruct the AI to generate college drama in the same style. Are the new works competing? The author won’t offer me a college drama in the first place.