• 1 Post
  • 23 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 3rd, 2024

help-circle

  • I really have a hard time deciding if that is the scandal the article makes it out to be (although there is some backpedaling going on). The crucial point is: 8% of the decisions turn out to be wrong or misjudged. The article seems to want us to think that the use of the algorithm is to blame. Yet, is it? Is there evidence that a human would have judged those cases differently? Is there evidence that the algorithm does a worse job than humans? If not, then the article devolves onto blatant fear mongering and the message turns from “algorithm is to blame for deaths” into “algorithm unable to predict the future in 100% of cases”, which of course it can’t…









  • Are you really this dense? The whole opt-in thing comes because Researchers found that Recall wasn’t encrypting shit and there was already a tool out to scrape this data automatically (Totalrecall). That was what I mentioned there. Come on, you must be trolling now. This is just laughable. But so you can’t be half-read my comments and make it fit your argument again, it’s even in the bloody article:

    Microsoft’s changes to the way the database is stored and accessed come after cybersecurity expert Kevin Beaumont discovered that Microsoft’s AI-powered feature currently stores data in a database in plain text. That could have made it easy for malware authors to create tools that extract the database and its contents. Several tools have appeared in recent days, promising to exfiltrate Recall data.


  • So your reply is, “but other people don’t read…”? Yeah, I’m not “other people”, so stop making me a scapegoat for behavior you’ve seen elsewhere (and on which I agreed with you, btw).

    Yet, you misunderstood my comment: Copilot is important. It not being encrypted is important (and hilariously naive). Where they put the turn on or off option in the setup menu ultimately is not. I wrote that pretty clearly. Didn’t you read my answer? That was the only information I could have gotten from the article I didn’t have already. Thing is: If I had read it (from a Screenshot I wouldn’t have seen anyway because I normally use reading mode, no less), I would still have commented on the dark patterns Microsoft uses to get you to send your “telemetry” to them.

    I have since skipped through the article and literally the only thing in there I didn’t know were those stupid screenshots. So why the heck would I read the article when I had read others just like it?

    You just saw something you’d been irritated about in other places and treated me (and others here) as if we were the offenders behind the things you saw as well, lashing out without provocation and felt justified because “it happens all the time”. While some of that’s correct, the people you went and “showed’em” aren’t the source of all evil, so skip the scapegoat bullshit and be civil towards people you’ve never talked to before, will ya?


  • So, are we done berating everybody passive-aggressively with just a sprinkle of condescension? Because maybe, just maybe, I was making a remark about the general practice of Microsoft to hide stuff behind nondescript bullshit names (especially in non-English versions where the English bullshit name gets translated literally most of the time, which yields even more nondescript results).

    Maybe, just maybe, you chose the wrong comments to act up on “PeOpLe NoT rEaDiNg ThE aRtIcLe” when all that was posted about was inconsequential stuff about the precise clicks needed to turn a feature off that’s not even in the respective menus yet. So this is not someone talking bullshit because they misunderstood the headline about a murder case or something.

    All that was said was about practices Microsoft has abused into oblivion: Hiding stuff behind obscure menus and hiding stuff behind obscure names. The comments made were a persiflage of exactly that.

    Maybe, just maybe, the precise placement and wording in a menu that doesn’t even exist yet is a topic inconsequential enough that people will not read the tenth article about the general subject (Copilot becoming “opt-in”) to make sure they wouldn’t miss this super irrelevant point to the story. A point which you guessed from screenshots that haven’t reached production yet (even if they are likely to go into production as shown, it can still change), so your condescending attitude is based on wobbly grounds.

    There are tons of articles where people post absolutely wrong and quite absurd stuff because they didn’t read the article. Some of them even matter (politics, world events). So let’s criticize people when they don’t read through actually important articles before posting, and agree that it’s okay to not read the exact article posted on unimportant sidenote stuff if one knows about the thing in general. Because if I’d be only allowed to comment on the article posted itself, I wouldn’t need Lemmy, I could just comment on the site that posted the article in the first place.

    Besides: You did notice that you commented on two different people, yes? Because you sure sounded like you didn’t read the usernames before commenting and thought you always replied to the same guy.



  • BEFORE you mess with your VNC, it is extremely important to have a backup connection. So either you have the ability to connect your pi to a monitor and a keyboard locally, or you really, really should setup SSH before you mess with your VNC server.

    Use SSH with a Certificate, described here: https://raspberrypi-guide.github.io/networking/connecting-via-ssh (“passwordless”) This guide doesn’t show how to set up SSH, but how to install a key in a more detailed way: https://pimylifeup.com/raspberry-pi-ssh-keys/

    The good thing: Once you got this working, you’re basically done. Just ditch VNC and go straight to SSH from now on. It’s more secure and has better performance usually.

    Yet, if you like your VNC and want to continue using it, you first connect via SSH do not do this while using a VNC connection! Now, first, you do all this: https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/install-vnc-raspberry-pi-os then you do a

    sudo update-alternatives --list vncserver
    sudo update-alternatives --list vncserver-x11
    

    you should see tightvnc listed there. Don’t freak out if one of the two returns an error that the application was not found. That’s okay. Not all versions of Raspbian used the same application name in the past, so I listed them both. As long as one of them works, you’re fine.

    Then, you do a

    sudo update-alternatives --config vncserver
    sudo update-alternatives --config vncserver-x11
    

    and change it to tightvnc. now you can stop your running VNC:

    sudo vncserver-x11 -service -stop && sudo vncserver -service -stop
    sudo vncserver-x11 -service -start && sudo vncserver -service -start
    

    Once you did that, connect to tightvnc as described in the article. If this works, do sudo apt uninstall realvnc

    You should now be able to connect via VNC without weird account bullshit.