You thought journalism had reached rock bottom already? Watch this:

Oh, no no, I was talking about the down votes that you’ve been receiving. My bad!

Doesn’t matter, it’s fun to see how far you can bend definitions (and I did go rather far with that one).

Also, I’m not sure where those down votes are coming from. Showerthoughts don’t need to be fully logical, taking all edge cases into account, etc. After all, it’s just a showerthought to discuss and joke/awe about.

In that case, you’d never see anything through anything but a “screen” because of the lens in your eye. (Using the definition of “screen” to be a “barrier”, which in this case provokes a transformation, or projection, of light.)

Ideally, a .mp4, or any other non-executable file format, would not be able to execute rogue code on your computer, but the programs you use to open the files with might have security flaws which allow rogue code execution if done right.

You might have a hypothetical file, which might not be dangerous if opened with VLC, but which exploits a flaw in, say, Windows Media Player version x.y.z to execute a payload.

Sorry, for not including any examples, I’m currently not at the PC.

Dunno about kids, but I’ve seen my fair share of grown men who appear to think so.

Ladders tend to be more stable if you lean them on the tree trunk, and not the branch you’re about to saw off.

I think i read that fighter pilots need to be able to identify a plane in one frame at 300 fps, and that the theoretical limit of the eye is 1000+ fps.

Though, whether the brain can manage to process the data at 1000+ fps is questionable.

Hurr hurr, I’m gonna plot f(x,y)=x^2+y3 where y=x for x limit inf. Checkmate science!

Edit: the graph isn’t actually linear, man, and here I just thought it’d be that easy. :(

This is the way!

Way simpler than using any GUI tool or somehow recreating the partition and manually copying the files.

Not sure if i understand the request, but there’s the !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com community if you’re looking for open signups.

Pretty sure Leif Eriksson landed in Vinland before Columbus landed in the Bahamas.

In other words, I’ll be formulating a proposal to Mette-Mink to reclaim what only can belong to the (once) glorious Denmark!

I’m gonna be honest: I’ve been skimping on anti malware since i moved to Linux.

Still keeping up the common sense part about running code you don’t know and running untrusted code and weird URLs in a virtual environment (well, except for the AUR perhaps), but I only scan for malware once or twice a year, if at all.

Actually, I just did a scan with RKHunter which came back clean except for the usual false flags, which I find mildly suspicious as one would imagine there to be some malware with all the small time programmers and script kiddies in the Linux community.

What are you using as anti malware? Anyone knows of good methods for set-and-forget or some good GUIs for easy containment management, scanning, and whitelisting? It can’t be that ClamAV, RKHunter, and chkrootkit are the only halfway decent AVs out there.

Hadn’t actually noticed it was Mac first before you mentioned it, but no, if it works for Mac, then it likely also works for Linux (and that’s what counts, right?).

Contrary to my previous statement, I’ve actually tried downloading Zed. The first thing I noticed was the “sign in” in the top right corner. Feels rather unsightly, but no biggie. It appears to redirect to GitHub authorization, after which it fails with a “OAuthCallback”-error. Might be my fault, can’t remember if I’ve disabled or limited unnecessary functionality in GitHub.

The design feels slick and most options are hidden away or represented by only a small icon with tooltips. It appears that no advanced settings page exists, as nearly everything is handled in JSON (initially thought that a visual settings page must have been hidden away deep down somewhere, but that appears to be wrong).

Coop programming seems to be a big feature, but I’ll skip that as it appears to need setup.

Also, the LLM part is not nearly as prominent as their front page makes it out to be, rather feels like an option than a prominent or forced feature, so that’s really nice.

The included extensions (nice to have them as they’re no given) appear to focus on themes and syntax, can’t find any cross-development nor compilation related extensions which is just fine. Compilation is best handled in the terminal anyway.

Overall it feels pretty solid, definitely different from the first impressions of their page. Might be even better with more diverse extensions, though, I haven’t looked at the internet for unlisted extensions, and I’m not sure how old the project is (the extensions might just not be made yet).

There’s also no pop-ups, start pages with all kinds of featured content, nor settings or buttons that grab your attention away from your work (except the login button, perhaps. I would like to see what it looks like once logged in).

I’m probably missing most features as my GitHub integration fails, but I’m overall positively surprised.

Hmmm, the front page looks like they’re trying to sell a LLM code generator with additional QOL to businesses, and not a developer focused IDE or extensible text editor.

Definitely not something that catches my interest as a developer. Though, I haven’t tried it, so these are just initial impressions from reading their landing page.

Edit: also, why down vote the above? It appears perfectly relevant to the discussion. If you disagree, why not make a comment about it instead?

Huh? That’s quite interesting.

I’ve been running a hacked-together script which uses a disembodied copy of Proton 8 (aka. copied to a portable drive, doesn’t need to have Steam installed to run) to launch my games from Itch and GoG.

Hmm, just tried to use Proton 9.0-2 and the current experimental in my steamapps (which appears to be version 9.0-202), and it works just fine. Though, I guess Lutris’ implementations are quite a bit more advanced than my hacks (no debugging let’s goooo).

A very simplified version of my script, for those who might be interested: pastebin.com/kbNNvzAx. Don’t forget to uncomment game_exe and set it to your executable - won’t work otherwise.

Also, pinging @DacoTaco@lemmy.world in case of interest.

I guess you could also ask: “Does the pro-tier give one any options/additional functionality that the non-pro/non-donation tier doesn’t?”

Obviously, if you have to pay for additional functionality (like settings/themes/updates) then it isn’t a simple ask for donation. Though, I’d argue to ignore trivialities such as “thank you”-emails and possibly a small visual-only token on the program that you paid/donated, as those barely count as “functionality”.

“Knowledge is never useless”

Going on a tangent here: While I fully agree with the above, there is an amount of knowledge after which fact checking becomes bothersome, and some people just skip fact checking overall. One could argue that, while knowledge is never useless, unchecked knowledge might become bothersome or dangerous.

See flatearthers, scientology, etc. for extreme examples.

~~“Batteries” is a rather broad category.

Are we talking hydroelectric batteries? Other potential or kinetic batteries? Chemical batteries (and what subcategory)? Or maybe hydrogen-based power storages?

Since there’s a dam on the list, I’d imagine “batteries” to be electrolytic power stores or hydrogen fuel cells, but the visualization remains lazy and perhaps borderline misinformative (depending on how nit-picky you are).

EDIT: The illustration might also use a simplified definition of a battery (to store, excluding conversion between kinds of power) instead of the different battery technologies which exist or the full definition, which could have one argue that batteries aren’t renewable by definition.

Though, that might be reading too much into it.~~

Actually, never mind, I’m probably too tired to go out on an adventure about the technicalities of the definition of “battery” to make any real amount of sense and not fall into edge cases.

I also misread “energy source” as “renewable”…

I feel that a lot of posts lately have been very “ugly” in terms of data representation. Dunno what that’s about, or if it’s just me.

You don’t have to sanitize the weights, you have to sanitize the data you use to get the weights. Two very different things, and while I agree that sanitizing a LLM after training is close to impossible, sanitizing the data you give it is much, much easier.