• 0 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle

  • Pretty much. Anyone who is 50 years old today would have been 8 years old when the NES launched. Lots of dads and mums in their 30s will have been hitting their teenage years well into the PSX era.

    Not everyone is or was a gamer, but very few parents with young families today will be old enough to predate gaming being widespread and mainstream.




  • Patch@feddit.uktoTechnology@lemmy.worldMailfence email
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 days ago

    That’s encryption in a nutshell. A message is encrypted until it reaches its destination, and then by necessity is unencrypted in order to read it. Once your recipient has the unencrypted message, you don’t have any control over what happens to it.

    Fundamentally, if you don’t trust the recipient (or their system provider), no amount of encryption will protect your message.


  • “Species concepts are human classification systems, and everybody can disagree and everyone can be right,” she says. “You can use the phylogenetic [evolutionary relationships] species concept to determine what you’re going to call a species, which is what you are implying… We are using the morphological species concept and saying, if they look like this animal, then they are the animal.”

    “If they look like this animal then they are the animal” really doesn’t sound like a particularly useful (or scientifically rigorous) position.

    Not least because there are lots of animals that look alike but aren’t the same species.



  • In my limited experience experience, Gemini responds better with flat, emotionless prompts without any courteous language. Using polite phrasing seems more likely to prompt “I can’t answer that sorry” responses, even to questions that it absolutely can answer (and will to a more terse prompt).

    So I think my point is “it depends”. LLMs aren’t intelligent, they just produce strings based on their training data. What works better and what doesn’t will be entirely dependent on the specific model.





  • There’s a direct quote from the company.

    According to a statement sent to The Verge by Eddie Garcia on behalf of Nintendo, it says preorders will no longer begin on April 9th:

    “Pre-orders for Nintendo Switch 2 in the U.S. will not start April 9, 2025 in order to assess the potential impact of tariffs and evolving market conditions. Nintendo will update timing at a later date. The launch date of June 5, 2025 is unchanged.”

    I’m also in Europe.



  • They’re definitely creatively stale, but they’re also undeniably good at what they do. They have by far the best selling console of the last generation, and are the only console company to consistently post healthy profits on their operation.

    Is it a bit naff that their next generation of games will almost certainly be yet another Zelda, yet another Mario, yet another Pokémon? Absolutely. But if their next Zelda game is yet another best-selling critically acclaimed success, who are we to say that they’ve got the wrong approach?




  • There’s also just no real incentive for them to do it. The number of devices running fully de-googled Android forks are miniscule in the grand scheme of things. Everyone running devices with non-standard Android but which still uses Google Play Services and the rest are just as valuable to Google as the ones running stock. And it suits Google to have the small ultra-privacy hobbyist market still running Android forks, even de-googled ones, rather than moving on to something else entirely.


  • For as long as it’s still under the Apache licence, they’re still obligated to release the source under the terms of that licence. They’d need to change the licence to stop providing code; which as you say, they could do, but that would also kill AOSP entirely overnight so is a bit of a bigger problem than the one described in the OP.


  • Is it possible? Sure.

    Even then, not really. Not legally, anyway. Open source licences require that the user be provided with the source code (if requested) alongside the binaries. If they roll out an update to Android (to code which is under an open source licence), they have to release the code at essentially the same time. Rolling out an update and then withholding the source code for an unnecessarily long time would be against the terms of the licence.