Check out https://www.giuspen.net/cherrytree/, lightweight note-taking app with interesting scripting function built in.
Even if that’s not your cup of tea, it has the option to save your notebook to a single sqlite file, so I take that as good enough proof it’ll work for your similar purposes as well.
… I thought that … nevermind, this is why I’m here.
The Elgato has a USB coming out of it and I thought that passing everything through it would allow the USB to feed/write the video stream without any other processing, I guess what I’ve really been after this whole time is more OBS tweaking.
The only thing you might want to do is go into the video settings and set it to use NVENC (I think you can do that on Linux) to offload the encoding to your GPU (which has dedicated encoding hardware) instead of your CPU.
I think this was a big missing piece for me.
For all my years in IT, I’ve never been an A/V nerd.>
Other backers include OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
WTF, no, this is worse in every way. So instead of being involved with the people and topics I choose, it’s instead left up to an algorithm? Somehow even more opaque than usual because of AI involvement.
This isn’t solving any problem, this is yet another mask to push content in front of people.
It is an opinion piece and I’m not gonna pretend it’s not heavily biased, but why shouldn’t it be? What are the reasons to own a Cybertruck when the whole intent of the product feels like a pro-Elon circlejerk?
I’m an average consumer and shall we say, an Elon-disdainer. I don’t like the man, though I have better things to do with my time than actively hate him. At first glance, it does not appear to even be a truck. It’s wild and awful looking, it doesn’t sell itself at all on the visuals alone so it had better have killer features. Which are … ?
Look, when you show up to my potluck with a literal crockpot full of shit, I don’t feel the need to entertain you. “Is that literal shit?” I ask. “It’s my grandmother’s recipe!” you reply. “Well that may be, but is it literal shit? In a crockpot? Cooking all day?” “You haven’t even tried it!”
I don’t know why I have to justify not eating shit. Coming up with reasons not to blindly consume transparently bad products was not a position I felt I’d ever need to reason myself out of.
EDIT: sorry if that came off sounding too critical of you, I don’t mean to attack you personally. But the shape of this discussion is a thorn in my side that sits at a particular junction between how we choose to see biases in media and modern consumerism and I think it warrants further investigation.
So it could possibly be construed to “Microsoft’s Dirty Operating System”, yeah?
You’re getting downvoted by cryptobros, but you are absolutely correct, there is no good use for block chain and never will be
It’s a fully public database among trustless parties. To the first point, there’s no reason any database can’t be made public if so desired. To the second point, for the block chain to have any meaning or value beyond itself, some authority eventually needs to interpret its contents. That authority might as well hold the database or, in trustless cases, a third party trustee. Nothing about it makes sense at a very base level, you don’t even need to explain the tech because it just doesn’t hold up logically.
There is a very meaningful difference between humane, highly regulated animal testing and what Musk is doing. Compounding this is the feeling that Musk’s high profile is what’s letting him get away with this in the first place. He wants to slap his name and face on everything for the credit when it’s good, be gets to be the lightning rod when it’s not.
Awful system, they’re always giving me much less than I expect.
There are no legitimate uses, full stop.
As others have pointed out, it’s just a fully public database. Its use case is among trustless parties, and that’s why it fails. At some point, somebody is going to want to take action off the data and that’s going to involve a trusted party enforcing it. Sooo … just have the trusted party host the data (and make it public if you really care). And if all the parties are truly that trustless, 1) why are they dealing with either and 2) get a third party trustee to broker your deals
No.
If I’m sitting on the couch and I want sushi, I can open up a website, pick exactly what I want, even maybe make a few substitutions for me specificity, and get it delivered right to my house, but that doesn’t mean I made sushi. I just HAVE sushi.
Anyone who has ever actually supported a real artist and commissioned work understands that they don’t own the copyright, unless extra agreements have been made to transfer it. It still belongs to the original artist.
And as stated, AI can’t own that. So no one does. Who would want to? It’s garbled, derivative work and anyone with access to the same prompt and models could generate it themselves, which is why I find the prompt guarding so hilarious. It’s all so blatantly dumb and transparent.
I’m right there with you.
Microsoft (and honestly a lot of mainstream software) has been slowly evolving over the years from providing robust, full-featured products that allow you build your own workflows to shipping things with an inherent “paradigm” or “ideology” on how they should be used. Mostly (unsurprisingly) to the ends of data collection, ad serving, and profit driving. Gross, gross, gross.
Thank you, that’s good clarification on what the actual motivations are here. Was having trouble following all the threads and sussing it out myself. Appreciate it.
Am I missing something obvious here? What is motivating such stringent measures to be put in place when things have been sufficient without them thus far? Who is asking for this?
I live in my own little online echo chambers, but even I can’t believe there’s enough ground swell for the government to step in on … What? Violence? Addiction? This is very confusing.
The original post was at least half joking in tone, but in seriousness, I think there’s an argument to be made that “posts” applies to topical threads. Threads that originate with a piece of content like a link or self post and that all following discussion is at least tangentially related. I’d call them posts here on Lemmy for that.
Tweets, however, often originate out of thin air, be it someone’s head or ass. When someone says, “Kanye West ‘tweeted’ <INSERT OPINION HERE>” you’ve already determined about how seriously you’re going to take it.
Not gonna lie, that still felt a little dirty. But I already posted it to the internet and there’s no going backsies.
Everything is tweets now, on all platforms; hear me out.
It might sound lazy, and I certainly have no loyalty to the Twitter brand, but if Musk isn’t going to defend it we have the opportunity to dilute and generalize the term (like zipper or band-aid). We can kill it dead AND reclaim it.
It’s a good word! Short, sweet, has familiarity, and is honestly pretty descriptive for the simple bird-like chatter of the discourse. Everything else proposed sounds dumb as hell, not to mention you’re doing the marketing for them. Don’t sell their brands - suffocate them!
Sorry, yes, still trying to wrap my head around it. It’s one of those things where there is quite obviously no direct benefit for the user. The company is trying to sell it as improving their content, moderation, security, etc. which may have indirect, knock-on effects for the end user but whether that would even be true or if it would be perceptible to your average person is MUCH more questionable.
It’s the same kind of thing when you see people defending exclusivity on consoles. I mean sure, it helps prop up your favorite company/developer in hopes that the market benefit may someday come back around and help them to produce more content/games that you like, but people seriously need to start looking out after their own self interests first and corporations be damned. They earn money by providing actual value, don’t ever argue against yourself.
Maybe somebody can do a better job of boiling this down than I can.
Basically, right now, if you ask for something on the internet, it gets served to you. Sure there are lots of server side protections that may require an account to log in to access things or what have you, but still you can at least request something from a server and get some sort of response in return.
What this does is force attestation through a third party. I can ask for something from a server and the server turns to the attester and goes, “Hey, should I give this guy what he’s asking for?” and the attester can say “No” for whatever reasons it might. Or worse yet, I can get the attestation but the server can then decide based in turn that it doesn’t like me having that attestation and I get nothing.
You can make arguments that this would be good and useful, but it’s so easy to see how this could go sideways and nobody with any sense should be taking Google or any of these large corporations at their word.
1000% this. Without giving away too much information, I work(ed) for a cloud provider (not one of the big ones, there are a surprising number of smaller ones in the field you’ve probably never heard of before). I quit this week to take a position in local government with some quaint, on-prem setup.
Mix all that together and then put the remaining pressure on the human aspect still holding things up and there’s a collapse coming. Once businesses get so big they’re no longer “obligated” to provide support, they’ll start charging you for it. This has always been a thing of course, anyone who’s worked enterprise agreements knows that. But in classic corpo values, they’re closing the gap. Pay more for support, get less in return. They’ll keep turning that dial until something breaks catastrophically, that’s capitalism baby.