• 1 Post
  • 66 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle





  • It’s a lot better now. I have an original Galaxy S and moving from it to a Nexus was a breath of fresh air. I was never I to the Samsung bloat.

    However, the Pixel line has been stagnating and Samsung had been working hard to add little quality of life features that honestly Android should have had a long time ago. The bloat is way less and a lot can be uninstalled. With a custom launcher on it it’s actually better than my Pixels (IMO).

    Google is just not interested in making Android more usable or real features. They want more AI and assistant nonsense. Dex is just something that Android should have had years ago, so it’s good that they’re starting but they’re way behind.




  • Therapy is well and good and I think we need far more avenues available for people to get help (for all issues). That said, sexuality and attraction are complicated.

    Let me start by saying I am not trying to state there is a 1:1 equivalence, this is just a comparison, but we have long abandoned conversion therapy for homosexuals, because we’ve found these preferences are core to them and not easily overwritten. The same is true for me as a straight person, I don’t think therapy would help me find men attractive. I have to imagine the same is true for pedophiles.

    The question is, if AI can produce pornography that can satisfy the urges of someone with pedophilia without harming any minors, is that a net positive? Remember the attraction is not the crime, it’s the actions that harm others that are. Therapy should always be on the table.

    This is a tricky subject because we don’t want to become thought police, so all our laws are built in that manner. However there are big exceptions for sexual crimes due to the gravity of their impact on society. It’s very hard to “stand up” for pedophilia because if acted upon it has monstrous effects, but AI is making us open this can of worms that I don’t belive we ever really thought through besides criminalizing and demonizing (which could be argued was the correct approach with the technology at the time).


  • foggenbooty@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.worldGibberlink
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I stand corrected. It seems odd to me that you would relegate all data transfer to the inaudible range, as you’ll have a lot less bandwidth to work with and will likely hit issues with compression technologies that are designed to filter those frequencies out.

    I guess the designers didn’t want it to sound so offputting like dial-up did. Still seems odd to me and I’m not surprised it failed my initial sniff test.


  • foggenbooty@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.worldGibberlink
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I assume people are shitting on it because it’s fake? At least it looks fake to me as the sounds they’re making seem the same each time.

    I imagine it would sound a lot more like a dialup modem if it were real as we got pretty good at sending data over audio channels back then. Likely that standard that already exists could be used.