And what happens with it also depends on how people, including software developers, react to it.

😂 🤝

A reminder also to boycott, as much as possible, those thirteen major publishers – most or all of which are stealing from academia:

APRESS MEDIA, LLC; CENGAGE LEARNING, INC.; ELSEVIER INC.; HACHETTE BOOK GROUP, INC.; HARPERCOLLINS PUBLISHERS LLC; JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC.; MCGRAW HILL LLC; BEDFORD, FREEMAN & WORTH PUBLISHING GROUP, LLC D/B/A MACMILLAN LEARNING; MACMILLAN PUBLISHING GROUP, LLC; PEARSON EDUCATION, INC.; PENGUIN RANDOM HOUSE LLC; SIMON AND SCHUSTER, LLC; AND TAYLOR & FRANCIS GROUP LLC

How some Linux developers defeated (for now) the new OS age-verification laws. Long live those Linux developers, who "heavily criticized the mandates", made public statements, and contacted the legislators.

Because other Linux developers, instead, immediately bent over backwards to start implementing changes towards accommodating those laws; for sure they didn't heavily criticize the mandates, nor make public statements, nor contact the legislators.

Something feels fishy... The user who made this pull request has more than doubled his contributions to various repositories since January (from 20–400 to more than 1100), and this is his first pull request in the systemd repo.

https://open-slum.org/

https://open-slum.pages.dev/ (unofficial mirror)

Keep an eye also on https://www.reddit.com/r/libgen/comments/1n4vjud/megathread_status_of_libgen/

From this github comment:

If you oppose this, don't just comment and complain, contact your antitrust authority today:

• US:
  • https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
  • antitrust@ftc.gov

• EU:
  • https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/contact_en
  • comp-greffe-antitrust@ec.europa.eu

• UK:
  • https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tell-the-cma-about-a-competition-or-market-problem
  • general.enquiries@cma.gov.uk

• India:
  • https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/
  • https://www.cci.gov.in/filing/atd

• Canada:
  • https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/frm-eng/GH%C3%89T-7TDNA5

Title:

ChatGPT broke the Turing test

Content:

Other researchers agree that GPT-4 and other LLMs would probably now pass the popular conception of the Turing test. [...]

researchers [...] reported that more than 1.5 million people had played their online game based on the Turing test. Players were assigned to chat for two minutes, either to another player or to an LLM-powered bot that the researchers had prompted to behave like a person. The players correctly identified bots just 60% of the time

Complete contradiction. Trash Nature, it's become only an extremely expensive gossip science magazine.

PS: The Turing test involves comparing a bot with a human (not knowing which is which). So if more and more bots pass the test, this can be the result either of an increase in the bots' Artificial Intelligence, or of an increase in humans' Natural Stupidity.

There's an ongoing protest against this on GitHub, symbolically modifying the code that would implement this in Chromium. See this lemmy post by the person who had this idea, and this GitHub commit. Feel free to "Review changes" --> "Approve". Around 300 people have joined so far.

Understandably, it has become an increasingly hostile or apatic environment over the years. If one checks questions from 10 years ago or so, one generally sees people eager to help one another.

Now they often expect you to have searched through possibly thousands of questions before you ask one, and immediately accuse you if you missed some – which is unfair, because a non-expert can often miss the connection between two questions phrased slightly differently.

On top of that, some of those questions and their answers are years old, so one wonders if their answers still apply. Often they don't. But again it feels like you're expected to know whether they still apply, as if you were an expert.

Of course it isn't all like that, there are still kind and helpful people there. It's just a statistical trend.

Possibly the site should implement an archival policy, where questions and answers are deleted or archived after a couple of years or so.

The number of people protesting against them in their "Issues" page is amazing. The devs have now blocked the creation of new issue tickets or of comments in existing ones.

It's funny how in the "explainer" they present this as something done for the "user", when it's clearly not developed for the "user". I wouldn't accept something like this even if it was developed by some government – even less by Google.

I have just reported their repository to GitHub as malware, as an act of protest, since they closed the possibility of submitting issues or commenting.