circuitfarmer

He’s obviously working for Big 586.

I wouldn’t call it an appliance, but I almost always use cast iron for beef.

I’ve really liked it. I’ve gone back and forth between Cosmic and their old Pop Shell on Gnome. I find the tiling system on Cosmic to be much better, especially on a multi monitor setup.

I also agree with another commenter that the file browser kind of sucks, but that’s a minor complaint right now.

Probably never masturbate again

I said it matters: “the difference is obvious”.

But for me, it does not justify the cost difference at the current time.

It does matter. But all my big displays are still LCD, because of cost.

It’s about blackpoint. With an LED, pixels which are black still have a backlight. This makes them a kind of grey.

With OLED, the pixels themselves emit light. This means that black pixels are unlit.

The difference is obvious in a dimly lit room looking at dark content.

That said, while I would love OLEDs all around, they’re expensive. I’m willing to give up having true blacks for the cost difference. It may be different as costs on OLED come down.

I do have an OLED phone, because Samsung is pumping out OLEDs on everything.

I love it.

Though some people will certainly take it wrong. The “iPhone is more expensive because it’s better” people will happily pay their Windows tax, assuming they’re even in the market for a Lenovo.

Almost everything you ingest from day to day on your PC, in terms of multimedia content, is compressed.

File compression is a necessity, as it makes transmission of such media over the internet much more teneble. But uncompressed video carries a lot more information – not necessarily all useful information, but it is there.

I can’t imagine a better result.

Love the meme, but also, let’s not pretend that Joe Rogan isn’t just a propagandandistic shill. If he were all of a sudden making such claims on his show, it might be different. Haven’t seen it.

This “China’s AI is taking your data and that’s bad” is shockingly similar to “TikTok is taking your data and that’s bad”. Lots of US counterparts do the same thing, but I don’t see (as much) media coverage about that.

Don Draper: “no no no, everyone else’s cigarettes are dangerous. Lucky Strikes are… toasted.”

Technically not my industry anymore, but: companies that sell human-generated AI training data to other companies most often are selling data that a) isn’t 100% human generated or b) was generated by a group of people pretending to belong to a different demographic to save money.

To give an example, let’s say a company wants a training set of 50,000 text utterances of US English for chatbot training. More often than not, this data will be generated using contract workers in a non-US locale who have been told to try and sound as American as possible. The Philippines is a common choice at the moment, where workers are often paid between $1-2 an hour: more than an order of magnitude less what it would generally cost to use real US English speakers.

In the last year or so, it’s also become common to generate all of the utterances using a language model, like ChatGPT. Then, you use the same worker pool to perform a post-edit task (look at what ChatGPT came up with, edit it if it’s weird, and then approve it). This reduces the time that the worker needs to spend on the project while also ensuring that each datapoint has “seen a set of eyes”.

Obviously, this makes for bad training data – for one, workers from the wrong locale will not be generating the locale-specific nuance that is desired by this kind of training data. It’s much worse when it’s actually generated by ChatGPT, since it ends up being a kind of AI feedback loop. But every company I’ve worked for in that space has done it, and most of them would not be profitable at all if they actually produced the product as intended. The clients know this – which is perhaps why it ends up being this strange facade of “yep, US English wink wink” on every project.