You might be interested in GadgetBridge.

It’s hardly their fault for thinking it was related to the AI LLM or multimodal models when in all actuality the article states that these “large physics models” may be any sort of configuration, including LLM transformers:

the models may use the transformer architecture that underlies LLMs, a generalized version of convolutional neural networks known as geometric deep learning, or an architecture that can solve partial differential equations called neural operators.

It seemed you really needed to take your frustrations out on someone else’s comment.

It said a preview was available for thousands of dollars but the full database is selling for hundreds of thousands. That seems more realistic for risk & storage/hosting costs.

They could be. Transitioning doesnt stop them from choosing to identify with a non-binary gender.

Are you thinking of intersex? Even in that scenario, I don’t believe that statement applies.

I would love to see the exploit. There are vulnerabilities discovered everyday that amount to very little in terms of use in real world implementations.

I actually have one I’m not using at the moment. The switches at within the back cover but that’s easily able to be reached within 5 seconds or so with no tools. It’s not exactly something you would be flipping on and off regularly though unless you had a very specific use case.

Anything that isn’t a hardware switch potentially leads itself to being bypassed, so the switches are your best bet for being sure it’s disabled.

Edit: there’s also this (I linked the case which shows the switches) phone which has switches on the outside for this purpose. I don’t know anyone who has used this one however.

Just one more crack in the levee against computer privacy. This is always how it starts.

No one asked anyone to make that change but it was done regardless. The laws created in those states were (from my understanding) implemented defensively in a political sense due to how federal laws were being considered but weren’t actively requested to be enforced technologically.

Those that don’t see this change as a step in a regressive trend but are in a position to make changes are usually the ones that lead us further down the path, intentionally or not.

You might have a 230V stove. The ones they age discussing in the article are 120V capable but to offload the need for more power they use battery.

New technology is released into medical field and executive board thinks “how can we harm people with this?”

It depends on the findings. Sometimes LD1 and LD99 are used if relevant. Look here for more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose

That’s not unheard of since LD50 literally stands for Lethal Dose for 50% [of a group]. There will always be those that can survive the LD50 as well as those that succumb to doses under it.

I’m sure there’s numerous potential reasons for it. Some may be relying on the consistency of their sleep schedule more than others, have responsibilities that reduce how much they can reasonably fit in their schedule, may not care about the quantity or quality of sleep they get, have a pre-existing sleep debt, have health issues that compound with sleep changes, alternative sleep schedules, genetic predispositions, or literally anything else related to how sleep, physical health, mental health, and bodily systems function.

If you think of how one thing being shifted can set other things way more off balance then it makes sense. I’m not an expert in any of this but it’s definitely a complicated topic at the very least.

I think most people are more willing to be apathetic than energized if they accept that their choices amount to little to no change.

This is actually incorrect. If you check the birthdate Pull Request changelog and compare with the actual files, all of those changes are still in place. The decision to revert was rejected by ‘poettering’ here.

I’d agree with you, except that it’s clear that the political systems we live under are flawed/non-functional. Non-compliance may be our next best shot at stopping these laws from getting any more traction.

It’s clear to me with the stance that the dev that closed the revert pull request that they aren’t willing to form any resistance to these types of changes. Actually, the revert pull request stated that their request was due to a number of people discussing the matter and they ultimately decided that there could be harm inflicted, yet the dev ‘poettering’ decided to supercede this decision. Not only is this the first crack in a hold-the-line situation with other major FOSS projects refusing to make the change but also shows their hand at how they stance themselves politically.

I was literally just thinking this right before reading your comment. There is no justification for this implementation outside of controlling and tracking your citizens.

Also, it’s nearly impossible to implement how they want since IOT devices exist so it doesn’t really make any sense as ruled.

I understand why you might think that’s best as a cultural more but I ultimately disagree with that stance since it is likely to lead to alienation and less understanding as a whole. Being open to outside perspectives and even constructive criticism from both parties is the best way finding mutual understanding.

This is actually supported by GrapheneOS currently, if you need that extra push. 😉

Not to mention that the flames while combusing are invisible by sight. It’s also really difficult to keep contained and if it leaks it has ~11x the impact of CO2 per this article.

I used to like the idea of hydrogen as an energy medium but all of its attributes combined just make it really infeasible to use except for immediate applications.

You say this like the 100 prior absurd things that have happened shouldn’t have occurred because we have a stable, sane system with checks and balances; but we don’t. So people that are complicit, or scared, or both are complying with demands that are not technically enforceable. I could see this as one of those orders that red states would gladly comply with.