moonshadow

joined 3 weeks ago
[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

I don't know the science and have never heard those claims, but I do know critters and they sure are friendly. I would say the single easiest critter to pet, right up there with deer. They are absolutely aware that no one wants to eat them and being cute gets em fed

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 26 points 1 week ago

Fucked up if true

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

All it takes to do your own research is some cat food, they very much are lol. They're smart and adaptable and fun to be around, great lil buddies

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 week ago (14 children)

My assumption wasn't that they learned on the fly, it was that they were trained on previous interactions. Eg the team developing them would use data collected from interaction with model v3 to train model v4. Seems like juicy relevant data they wouldn't even have to go steal and sort

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago (16 children)

Can you help correct this for me? Don't you feed them valuable training data and exposure to real world problems in the process of using them?

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago

15 years ago you were naive enough to believe their bullshit and public perception was still important to their success. "Embrace, extend, extinguish" isn't healthy participation in open source. Think M$ was the one who actually stated things that way, but google was absolutely playing the same game

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago

My friend, have you considered cleaning the valve ~once every 10 years as opposed to beating it monthly? It's not hard to do!

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 week ago

Brakes are obviously essential, cruise control isn't mandatory, lighting doesn't require a single pcb. Wipers can be pretty simple but are already one of the more expensive/annoying things to fix on a car, a mandated screen (and inevitable infotainment system along with it) to make up for lack of visibility over a mandated high beltline is just... not something I want to deal with. And you know the surveillance state's gonna tap the feeds from those millions of cameras and stick us with the bill for the hardware to do it, way too juicy source of data not to

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Just a screen, camera, sensor, relay, 20ft of wire, nbd right? It's not like that makes stuff more expensive or harder to work on or anything

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Buddy my whole car was $500 and I have an insatiable desire to keep it that way. Less components not more across the board please. I don't know what kind of bougie-ass bubble you're living in where a cheap car is $20k, but I sure hope it pops while we've still got a planet

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Clankers shouldn't be allowed to drive at all, much less mandated. I miss when cars were more "dangerous" but cheaper, simpler, and more efficient. My 1994 Toyota pickup will still be running long after the last of these rolling smartphones are bricked by a lack of updates or Certified Service Components. We've been through this already on heavy equipment, I'm mad about having to hack tractors and mad people would fall for safety as an excuse to complicate basic tech we rely on and increase dependence on corporations for service

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 24 points 1 week ago

It's almost like the "economy" has fuck-all to do with quality of life and a couple business owners getting rich isn't worth commodifying your home!

view more: ‹ prev next ›