antonim

joined 1 year ago
 
[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 day ago

Yeah, totally makes sense, "they" attacked IA one month in advance before the elections, knowing that IA would spend around a month rewriting and improving their site code until the Save Page option would be enabled again (unless IA themselves are a part of the plot???), so that news articles could be "edited on the fly" (with what result?) until the election day, while other similar web archiving services such as archive.is would keep working just fine.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 day ago

clbottomt when the chtopt shows up [imagine this as that popular GIF meme]

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

Thanks. It's a part of history I know very little about.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I meant the "for over a hundred years" part specifically, I bolded it but it's not as noticeable as it should be.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago (5 children)

the US a terrorist nation for couping democratically elected leader in favour of dictators for over a hundred years

Is this really true?

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

And that's more or less what I was aiming for, so we're back at square one. What you wrote is in line with my first comment:

it is a weak compliment for AI, and more of a criticism of the current web search engines

The point is that there isn't something that makes AI inherently superior to ordinary search engines. (Personally I haven't found AI to be superior at all, but that's a different topic.) The difference in quality is mainly a consequence of some corporate fuckery to wring out more money from the investors and/or advertisers and/or users at the given moment. AI is good (according to you) just because search engines suck.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

Reminds me of the "help me budget this" meme.

"Have fewer genocides."

"No."

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 6 days ago (8 children)

Germans excused Holocaust by... saying that it would prevent trans genocide?

This is too stupid even for a troll.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 days ago

Then, you end up finishing the game

I.e. you do win...

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

AI LLMs simply are better at surfacing it

Ok, but how exactly? Is there some magical emergent property of LLMs that guides them to filter out the garbage from the quality content?

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

If you don't feel like discussing this and won't do anything more than deliberately miss the point, you don't have to reply to me at all.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (7 children)

they’re a great use in surfacing information that is discussed and available, but might be buried with no SEO behind it to surface it

This is what I've seen many people claim. But it is a weak compliment for AI, and more of a criticism of the current web search engines. Why is that information unavailable to search engines, but is available to LLMs? If someone has put in the work to find and feed the quality content to LLMs, why couldn't that same effort have been invested in Google Search?

369
rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
 
1
submitted 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) by antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/linguistics@mander.xyz
 

The dispersal of the Indo-European language family from the third millennium BCE is thought to have dramatically altered Europe’s linguistic landscape. Many of the preexisting languages are assumed to have been lost, as Indo-European languages, including Greek, Latin, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic and Armenian, dominate in much of Western Eurasia from historical times. To elucidate the linguistic encounters resulting from the Indo-Europeanization process, this volume evaluates the lexical evidence for prehistoric language contact in multiple Indo-European subgroups, at the same time taking a critical stance to approaches that have been applied to this problem in the past.

Part I: Introduction

Guus Kroonen: A methodological introduction to sub-Indo-European Europe

Part II: Northeastern and Eastern Europe

Anthony Jakob: Three pre-Balto-Slavic bird names, or: A more austere take on Oštir

Ranko Matasović: Proto-Slavic forest tree names: Substratum or Proto-Indo-European origin?

Part III: Western and Central Europe

Paulus S. van Sluis: Substrate alternations in Celtic

Anders Richardt Jørgensen: A bird name suffix *-anno- in Celtic and Gallo-Romance

David Stifter: Prehistoric layers of loanwords in Old Irish

Part IV: The Mediterranean

Andrew Wigman: A European substrate velar “suffix”

Cid Swanenvleugel: Prefixes in the Sardinian substrate

Lotte Meester: Substrate stratification: An argument against the unity of Pre-Greek

Guus Kroonen: For the nth time: The Pre-Greek νϑ-suffix revisited

Part V: Anatolia & the Caucasus

Rasmus Thorsø: Alternation of diphthong and monophthong in Armenian words of substrate origin

Zsolt Simon: Indo-European substrates: The problem of the Anatolian evidence

Peter Schrijver: East Caucasian perspectives on the origin of the word ‘camel’ and some notes on European substrate lexemes

 
 

Quite frequently I come across scanned books that are viewable for free online. For example, the publisher put them there (such as preview chapters), a library (old books from their collection that are in public domain), etc. Since I like hoarding data, and the online viewers that are used to present the book to me might not be very practical, I frequently try to download the books one way or another. This requires toying with the "inspect element" tool and various other methods of getting the images/PDF. Now, all that I access is what is, well, accessible; I don't hack into the servers or something. But - the stuff is meant to be hidden from the normal user. Does that act of hiding the material, no matter how primitive and easily circumvented, mean that I'm not allowed to access it at all?

I suppose ripping a public domain book is no big deal, but would books under copyright fare differently?

Mainly I'm asking out of curiosity, I don't expect the police to come visit me for ripping a 16th century dictionary.

Note: I live in EU, but I'd be curious to hear how this is treated elsewhere too.

Edit: I also remembered a funny trick I noticed on one site - it allows viewing PDFs on their website, but not downloading, unless you pay for the PDF. But when you load the page, even without paying, the PDF is already downloaded onto your computer and can be found in the browser cache. Is it legal to simply save the file that is already on your computer?

 
152
rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
 
 
 
 
18
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
 

(I don't know where else to post, maybe someone here can help, and Neocities is open source...)

I want to create a site on Neocities. I fill out the signup form, solve the captcha, but when I click the "Create My Site" button, nothing happens. I click it again, and after a delay it starts loading something, but then just says "The captcha was not valid, please try again."

This happens regardless of the browser, machine or IP address I'm using.

Does anyone have any idea what might be the problem, and hopefully how to solve it? Is it just me or does anyone else have the same issue? I've sent an email to the admins two days ago, but still have gotten no reply, and I can find no info on this elsewhere online.

EDIT (20-8-2024): It's working now, probably they fixed it, woo! :D

255
rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
 
view more: next ›