[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/tech/ - Technology

"Technology reveals the active relation of man to nature"
Password (For file deletion.)


IRC Chat





| Catalog | Home

File: 1612129656526.gif (2.28 MB, 224x240, 1608608621350.gif)

 No.6724[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

This thread is only for feedback related to technical issues(bug reports, suggestions). Otherwise use
Public Repo: https://github.com/towards-a-new-leftypol/leftypol_lainchan
If you have any grievances you can make a PR.

Mobile Support: https://github.com/PietroCarrara/Clover/releases/latest
Thread For Mobile Feedback: >>>/tech/6316

Onion Link: http://wz6bnwwtwckltvkvji6vvgmjrfspr3lstz66rusvtczhsgvwdcixgbyd.onion
Cytube: https://tv.leftychan.net
Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/#Leftypol:matrix.org
Once you enter, consider joining the lefty technology room.

We are currently working on improvements to the site, subject to the need of the tech team to sleep and go to their day jobs. If you need more immediate feedback please join the matrix room[s] and ask around. Feel free to leave comments, concerns, and suggestions about the tech side of the site here and we will try to get to it as soon as possible

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
200 posts and 57 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1678937328590.png (1.88 MB, 1536x1024, 608bfd6724eb6e62e9ae5dc04b….png)

>We don't really know where it is located in the source code because lainchan is spaghetti code
The bug is caused by instantiating the index template
using the $config of the openBoard call of the buildOne call of whichever thread happens to be last in the $top_threads loop.

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any clean way to access the board-independent global config once openBoard has been run at least once. So a general solution may need to save a reference to the board-independent global config into a new global variable as soon as it is available
and pass that to the instantiation of the index template.

File: 1678482063414.png (21.89 KB, 900x878, tux-package.png)


What's your take on linux software distribution ?

There's a lot of buzz around flat-pack and flat-hub atm, they are currently implementing a monetization feature. And for some reason Eric Schmidt the google-guy is involved somehow.
flathub isn't calld flub
I'm worried that once money is involved it will attract scammers and litigation for a payout type people. Also the payment processor they want to use is stripe, that's probably not anonymous

Ubuntu has removed flat-pack from it's official releases, to push it's snap package manager instead, i wonder if they have other reasons than "we're going to make our own pack-manager with blackjack and hookers" to yeet flat-pack from their system.

I think the best package manager in the end might be NIX

Is going from distro repositories to this type of stuff going to improve software distribution on linux ?
12 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>use proprietary license only for their assets
*art assets

you know, so that people can actually safely pirate it and not worry about malware

AI generated art is gonna make artists obsolete anyway, or at least the highly skilled ones


File: 1679145268817.jpg (27.88 KB, 458x458, 1670716670245357.jpg)

I think the main problem is that there should be a clear delimitation between gnu/linux as a tool (gentoo, nix, guix, etc.) and gnu/linux as a consumer OS

I use gentoo as my daily driver because I like foss and programming (as a hobby) and portage is more or less what I would do if I decided to write a personal package manager. if I also wanted reproducibility, the end result would be very similar to guix. these package managers are just what a programmer would expect, the intuitive approach to the problem so to speak

I have no idea what people who want to use linux as a consumer OS to do office work or play windows games need, but I'm sure their requirements are not the same as mine. I don't want them to modify my tools to accommodate for their needs, and the feeling is probably mutual

so that's my take I guess. I had to program on windows at work some years ago and it was terrible. the one size fits most approach is a waste of time

>unneccesarily convoluted build system
you probably use shit like autotools and cmake already. meson is way less convoluted than the alternatives


>I think the main problem is that there should be a clear delimitation between gnu/linux as a tool (gentoo, nix, guix, etc.) and gnu/linux as a consumer OS

I think if you do this and appeal to normies by making gimped distros like silverblue to more easily facilitate browsing facebook, you get hordes of screeching uneducated retards like the userbase of /r/linux going WHY DOESN'T THE DOLBY ATMOS FOR MY NETFLIX WORK, WHY DOES THE SETTINGS MENU HAVE SO MANY BUTTONS, IT'S CONFUSING, LINUX IS SHIT!!!

and in response to that you have huge developers like redhat pandering to them by writing software like GNOME that is intentionally gimped in functionality yet at the same time crowds out all other alternatives from the ecosystem because it has such institutional force behind it, and shit like baked-in DRM, TPM attestation (to enforce the DRM), immutable root (to keep the retards from breaking their distro and whining about it), wayland shit which screenrecording and keybinding doesn't work half the time (because some retard might download malware which will keylog them), ad nauseam.

linux should always remain a tool. if the tool can be made easier to use without compromising on functionality, then fine. but it should always remain a tool.


File: 1679702623951.jpg (930.34 KB, 850x1200, 1679681748776788.jpg)

>I think if you do this
do what? keep a delimitation? do you think there should be no difference between gentoo and ubuntu?
from the rest of your message I can see that you are not as retarded as to suggest that. in principle we agree, but it is not like you can stop ibm and redhat from doing what they are doing. the best and only realistic alternative is to try to keep the tool separate from the consumer environment - this is what I call delimitation


the problem is it's difficult to keep "linux the tool" and "linux the consumption device" segregated so that the latter doesn't crush the former

File: 1677265486701.jpg (51.35 KB, 351x356, Foss AI.jpg)


Recently there has been a lot of commotion around large language model text based AI.
They are able to do impressive stuff, they give useful answers, and even can write somewhat usable programming sample code.

The most famous one currently is chatgpt, but all of those AIs are basically black boxes, that probably have some malicious features under the hood.

While there are Open-Source Implementations of ChatGPT style Training Algorithms
Those kinda require that you have a sizeable gpu cluster like 500 $1k cards that are specialized kit, not your standard gaming stuff. To chew through large language-models with 100 billion to 500 billion parameters.

The biggest computational effort is the initial training run, that chews through a huge training data-set. After that is done, just running the thing to respond to your queries is easier.

So whats the path to a foss philosophy ethical AI ?
Should people do something like peer to peer network where they connect computers together to distribute the computational effort to many people ?

Or should people go for reducing the functionality until it can run on a normal computer ?
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
2 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1677588471311.jpg (110.19 KB, 896x1062, LLaMa by meta.jpg)

Check this out

Meta of all companies is promising that they will make an open source AI that you can run on your own computer.

Did the Zuck really go from "Dumb fucks giving me all their private data" to "lets Democratize AI"
Is there a catch ?


Probably a Free-as-in-Free-Labor license with obfuscated code.



<The fun did not stop with the MacBook Pro. Other engineers got LLaMA running on Windows machines, a Pixel 6 smartphone, and even a Raspberry Pi. Granted, it runs very slowly on the Raspberry Pi 4, but considering that even a few weeks ago it would have been unthinkable that a GPT-3-class LLM would be running locally on such hardware, it is still a very impressive hack.

This seems like something worth while getting into.
Does anybody have a handle on this ?


File: 1678996558308.jpg (53.19 KB, 446x444, lama out the bag.jpg)

darn it forgot the picture


>So whats the path to a foss philosophy ethical AI ?
The source code being open is not enough. The dataset the AI is trained on must also be open, and it must be possible to verify the trained AI against that dataset. It is entirely possible to hide undetectable backdoors inside machine learning agents.

>Should people do something like peer to peer network where they connect computers together to distribute the computational effort to many people ?

There's a [email protected] style thing for AI called "petals", which turns a distributed network into an AI. The problem is, there's currently no way of verifying if a node is fabricating its computations or injecting fraudulent results, and it's not clear at all if verifying such a thing is even possible (short of instituting homomorphic encryption over the top of the network)

>Or should people go for reducing the functionality until it can run on a normal computer ?

Basically all the new capabilities of these chatGPT-style AIs stem not from new algorithms, but throwing masses of computing power at old algorithms through brute force. So running it on a home desktop machine is not going to accomplish much.

>I guess the most useful feature is the computer-code generator, because you might be able to use that to make better Foss Ai software in the future, and help you with creating libre open source programs.

I strongly advise against using code generators to contribute to open-source software as the code they emit is likely copyright infringement (distributing significant sections of the source without the associated license attached), even though it hasn't been tested in court yet.

File: 1676494695487.png (43.62 KB, 876x1143, corporate trash can.png)


Samsung is lobbying to get a general exclusion order against phone-screen imports in the US.
They claim it's because screens that are imported by the phone repair-shops do a muh-patent-infringerino.

The real reasons is because Apple wants to switch their screen supplier to BOE, and Samsung wants a monopoly on screens.
Samsung can't go after Apple directly because Apple has enough money to wage patent-warfare until the end of time.
Samsung can't go after BOE because that's a Chinese company, and patent-trolling doesn't fly in China.

The result is going to be the destruction of the repair industry, and a precedent for banning technology parts as a means for installing a monopoly. If you aren't allowed to get parts for fixing your stuff, it's more corporate shit encroaching on personal possessions.

here is a video from Rossmann going into more details
His take is to make Samsung a dirty word.

My questions:
Would it not be a better strategy to bypass this by (legally grey) relabeling tech parts and importing them anyway. So that Samsung gets cut out completely ?
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


intellectual property must be destroyed


File: 1677774928250.jpg (17.01 KB, 600x600, st,small,507x507-pad,600x6….jpg)

>Would it not be a better strategy to bypass this by (legally grey) relabeling tech parts and importing them anyway. So that Samsung gets cut out completely ?
Based accelerationChads on leftychan identifying lines of flight and creating Zones of Offensive Opacity against the monopolization of capital. Remember, Marx voted for free trade specifically for it's accelerating, destabilizing effects against the companies.


File: 1679515626879.jpg (115.34 KB, 870x500, soldiering the motherboard….jpg)

EU right to repair legislation has dropped

the official document says:
<1 - A right for consumers to claim repair to producers, for products that are technically repairable under EU law, like a washing machine or a TV. This will ensure that consumers always have someone to turn to when they opt to repair their products, as well as encourage producers to develop more sustainable business models.
<2 - A producers' obligation to inform consumers about the products that they are obliged to repair themselves.
<3 - An online matchmaking repair platform to connect consumers with repairers and sellers of refurbished goods in their area. The platform will enable searches by location and quality standards, helping consumers find attractive offers, and boosting visibility for repairers.
<4 - A European Repair Information Form which consumers will be able to request from any repairer, bringing to repair conditions and price, and make it easier for consumers to compare repair offers.
<5 - A European quality standard for repair services will be developed to help consumers identify repairers who commit to a higher quality. This ‘easy repair' standard will be open to all repairers across the EU willing to commit to minimum quality standards, for example based on duration, or availability of products.

I don't know if those rules are any good because you usually have to be a level 12 legal wizard to understand what it really means, so I'm deferring to somebody else for that judgement.

here is a video of Louis Rossmann ranting about the centralized database (point 4) where repair services have to compete on price
The reason he's upset is because if all repair shops have to compete in a central market place their margins will be razor thin and won't be able to accumulatePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: 1679354506511-0.jpg (91.18 KB, 1200x900, fuse.jpg)

File: 1679354506511-1.png (55.55 KB, 1160x1072, nukes-in-space-vacuum.png)


It's potentially possible to use modified low-yield fusion bombs for power generation.

It's definitely not the first choice for generating fusion energy, but since the technology has already been developed, and the production-facilities are build, one might as well repurpose military tech for civilian use. Weaponized bombs and energy-generating-bombs are similar but not the same, so the currently existing low yield bombs aren't directly usable for this but they could be modified or recycled for raw materials. Existing weapons-stock can be burned up in power generation.

The technical principle is that you put a low-yield thermonuclear device into the center of a giant hollow vacuum "filled" metal-sphere that is lined with led, and by detonating the fusion bomb, the big metal ball gets really hot, and you can use that as a high-grade heat-source for power-generation.

It might be useful to do this as a power-satellite in earth orbit, because space already has a gratis vacuum and you can use a mirror array to send infrared heat-energy to many different power-receiver stations which reduces the load on electrical grids. It can also be used to power container ships and huge water desalination plants.

This would use mostly off-the-shelf parts which would greatly reduce the engineering requirements, and could be build very quickly. As a parallel development high priority project, this could go online in a few years.

The economics on this are pretty good, even capitalism might be able to pull this off, because this is not a long term project and upfront capital costs aren't that high. The political aspect might be harder however, because mass-producing tiny h-bombs might ruffle some feathers.


okay, suppose I want to build one of your engines in my backyard, how thick should the metal-sphere be? can I use recycled steel cans?


File: 1679405045568.jpg (95.9 KB, 885x608, steam punk fusion.jpg)

>okay, suppose I want to build one of your engines in my backyard, how thick should the metal-sphere be?
It just has to be strong enough to hold a vacuum inside, while being really hot.
>can I use recycled steel cans?
In principle yes, just consider that most cans are made from aluminum these days.

I'm not sure if you meant this request in earnest, but in principle this can be miniaturized, and build like a steampunk fusion reactor. Except for the small fusion bombs that essentially are the fuel, those get more complicated to make the smaller the reactor gets.
The fusion reaction is set off by a fission reaction that needs a critical mass of fissionable materials. You would need exotic materials to make that happen in a small size. For example Californium-252 reaches critical mass at 1.8 grams, and that would allow you to make a really tiny fusion bomblet for a small reactor. You have to store it in cold conditions below -15°C / 5°F to keep stable. So a really reliable freezer is a must-have to store your fuel igniter-caps.

You would place the ball into a tank filled with salt. Purge the tank with nitrogen gas before adding salt to avoid corrosion problems. You run radiator pipes through the salt and if you put water into one end of the pipe it will come out as steam on the other end. The salt is a cheap way of storing lots of heat energy in a smallish space, it's not critical and you can also use something else like quarts-sand or graphite-powder.

Even if you could manage to get Californium, i don't recommend building this as the most ambitious diy project in history, because if your vacuum seal fails it will vaporize your yard and a bunch more.

File: 1679301831976.jpg (41 KB, 850x478, desktop-wallpaper-a-mikoto….jpg)


Recommend a virtual phone number, to register on Telegram


register at a gym namefag

File: 1679000369278.png (305.7 KB, 760x512, image6-1.png)


Does anyone actually know how to make money on the Forex market? Been trying for years, but nada.


Before we get to foreign exchanges

Finance 101: It's a zero-sum game, for some people to win others have to lose.

There are 4 rungs:

-The lowest rung in this game is guessing what's going to happen and then gambling with investment, this is not sensible, don't do it this is the looser-rung.
-The next rung is having insider information about what is going to happen so that you know what you can invest in with a guaranteed return.
-The rung above that is having the ability to affect the world in a way to make your investments give you returns.
-The top rung is having control over institutions so that you can rig the game in your favor.

Foreign exchanges are affected allot by foreign policy of countries, if you can get insider information about decisions in that field before it's made public, you can sensibly predict it and make some money off it. If you're the one making foreign policy decisions that's also a way. Controlling something like a central bank, that's probably the best position.


Why forex? Just do options. They are at least better than forex. I wouldn't do forex with out a large savings of cash.

File: 1678879397568.jpg (602.28 KB, 1500x1200, an.jpg)


What would a video conferencing application that can support multiple billion users look like?

Can it be made decentralized with guaranteed high availability?

How can moderation be organized in such an application? I guess some aspects can be programmed in, like speaking time limits, and speaking order could be randomized. Also considering all users would be authenticated could muting or kicking be organized on a voting basis?

I honestly was thinking about VR chat based assembly but that seems far more cumbersome.
39 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Anyway, this is just me entertaining the possibilities.

One thing is certain - digital spaces allow humans to go beyond physical limits. To not take advantage of this in collective decision making is foolish. The possibilities outweigh the risks in my opinion.


You want to combine both physical and virtual space, i guess that could work, but i think you are taking IT Security too lax.
How do you organize the token issuers, so that it doesn't become a gate-keeper organization that has too much power ?

>How is it not democratic when majority votes to burn someone at the stake?

Are you trolling me ?
If you want the rule by the demos, you can't just burn a part of it to death.

>You seem to think that democracy only means pacifism. When democracy perfectly can be bloodthirsty.

If you mean engaging in warmongering like the neocon-regimes, no democracies tend not to do that because most people loose out in wars.

>Democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Nothing more, nothing less.

If that's what you want, why are you trying to create a dictatorship of the ostracisers, which are by no means a majority.

>why would the majority undermine a majority principle that empowers it?

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


>you are taking IT Security too lax
well assuming there are hundreds of millions of nodes to compromise the network you would need to compromise hundreds of millions of machines

hardware tokens would ensure authentication tied to real unique identities

open voting means that any results could be independently analyzed and verified for meddling

so that leaves the development platform and distribution channels

development should be carried by some government institution
how you would control this institution is how you would control any public institution that manages critical infrastructure

and there is always going to be critical infrastructure in society

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


What I'm getting at is that assembly can't just be a rubber stamp organ with passive public who only listens and doesn't have any control over the agenda or the means to punish individual speakers.


>well assuming there are hundreds of millions of nodes to compromise the network you would need to compromise hundreds of millions of machines
There is evidence that pretty much all consumer computers are already back-doored.
You can't brush this off, you would be handing over political-power to what ever organizations are able to exploit the backdoors.
There is no inherent security in having large numbers of computers.
You have to assume that all the computer technology you can't inspect is compromised.

independent vote-verification can't fix vote-manipulation on the massive scale that's possible with computers, the verification process doesn't have enough through-put.

>how you would control this institution

You develop all the technology in the open so that everybody can inspect it, we'll be able to make it secure enough that, it'll cost more to break the security than what can be gained from doing so. Additionally we could fund competing security checking organizations.

>look man, in any assembly there is a speaker and a public he is speaking to

>the public needs to have control over the speaker, which is done through moderation

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: 1678626418451.jpg (110.73 KB, 1200x675, pedo surveilance attack.jpg)


So the EU is apparently pondering to make a mandatory pedo scanner for software.

Many people have pointed out that this is just a pretext to attack:
IT security
and maybe even free open source software.

Many people think it's surveillance organizations them selves that are uploading the CSAM on purpose to push for laws that expand their legal permissions.

And all of the above is undoubtedly true.
Consider that if you invert the assumption of innocence and declare that wanting privacy makes you into a pedo-suspect that means that secret organizations have to be considered pedo-guilty by default, because they can't prove their innocence while keeping their secrets either.

If you argue that effective encryption that can't be broken which is absolutely necessary for the very concept of privacy, has to be undermined for the pedo-scanner. Then that same argument has to be made for proprietary software. Many pieces of proprietary software are in the range of tens or hundreds of gigabytes, and without publicly available source-code it's possible to hide a huge assortment of pedo-content in there. By contrast it's not possible to hide pedo-stuff in open source software.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
6 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Hmm that's kind off an unexpected reply.
I don't know if this really is about right-left bourgeois direction-politics or a cultural issue.

If you want to fight pederasty you need to fund investigative police-work, like with detectives and crime laboratory stuff. And you need highly trained social workers that can figure out if children are in social conditions that could lead to molestation.

I don't really see the point of bothering with computer and internet stuff, by the time pedophile-porn ends up on the internet it's too late and the damage has been done.

If you find the pedos in meat-space that will fix the internet content problem by extension.

If this really is about protecting children online, then i would be onboard with a general ban to post pictures of non-adults online. Because that makes it a privacy argument. You can argue that children can't consent to their likeness being published, because they aren't legally able to consent. Parents arguably don't have that right either because it might have effects beyond childhood and that would be violating the privacy rights of future legal adults.

The big advantage of a general age restriction mechanism is that there is no need to have a data-base full of CP to create anti-CP-filters. And you won't end up with government institutions or private corporations that are filled with pedophiles ""managing the illegal content containment"". You can have a relatively simple algorithm that is very accurate at guessing the age of somebody even when photos don't include a face. There's no need to do any invasive stuff like hack into the phones and computers of private persons either. And the age-guessing algorithm has no legally problematic technical components derived from CP, so it can be opensource code that can be inspected to make sure there are no malicious features. It's also very light on computation resources, cheap compact-cameras with 500mhz MIPS-architecture processors could do this a decade ago. You can add this to any website or app without it becoming a regulation that promotes big tech-monopolies because only they are able to have the technical and legal capacity to implement it.

I don't believe for a second that the people who have proposed the CP-scanner laws care about protecting children, because they want to undermine the privacy anPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 1678748475723.jpg (166.71 KB, 680x383, 1678496065365100.jpg)

Can you not derail the thread with your crackpot conspiracies about Covid and Globla warming which are actually real threats you moronic faggot and mass shootings are too even if liberals have a dumb ass backwards way of fixing it.

Are you seriously this dumb?
Covid and global warming are not comparable to this at all.


>Spooked, cartoon watched, failed adult


>Another retard with nothing of value to say/


>Quotations of comrade dunning kruger

File: 1674839845102.png (34.58 KB, 1505x1299, AI copy pasta.png)


Why is there so much mystification around AI.
It's a method of statistical brute-force pattern recognition and generation.
Is it meant to dissuade people from seeing it as a tool they could learn to use?
Or was it just the hype intended to get investor money taking on a life of it's own.
17 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


That's saying something given their standards.


>I'm a hard materialist, so I think that the human brain is doing information processing, using electrical signals and neuro chemistry.

If anything this makes you a vulgar materialist. Define information for me.


>If anything this makes you a vulgar materialist
You are using this as a taunt in tribal discourse, that makes it meaningless as a theoretical criticism.

>Define information for me.

That's a huge subject that defies the requirements of brevity for posts such as this one, you have to read Claude E Shannon The Mathematical Theory of Communication. I tried to include the Book in the attachment but i can't upload files with a djvu file-extension, and after converting it to pdf the file size was too big. Sorry you have to get it from libgen or something in case you're interested


File: 1675108078519.jpeg (32.47 KB, 400x379, TimeIsAlwaysOnMySide.jpeg)

>Define information for me.


File: 1677535006550.jpg (66.78 KB, 884x791, deep-fake-video-beauty-fil….jpg)

Remember deep fakes from a few years ago ?
That tech has gotten really good and it's now being used for video filters that make people look way better than they actually look

check this out


this is sort of AI related, and i didn't feel like making a new thread, so

Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
Previous [ 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16 / 17 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 23 / 24 / 25 / 26 / 27 / 28 / 29 / 30 / 31 / 32 / 33 / 34 / 35 / 36 ]
| Catalog | Home