It cannot be understated how absolutely deranged the orb has been from the beginning. Sam Altman is creating the problem (AI botspam) and promising he has the solution (this ungodly trash) at the same time.
Scam altman even sent a crew to Kenya to try coloniz… Uh, debankin… Oh, scanning eyeballs in exchange for a few piddly dollars. In response, Kenya booted his project out.
So he turned his sights to a country he apparently can exploit: the USA.
Feds: “We need a backdoor to encrypted messaging to prevent terrorist attacks!”
Terrorist: unencrypted plans on fucking roblox
Mr McCarthy, does this version of DeepSeek - named after a blatant pro-America virtue signal - suffice to be adequately American enough for you
That’s a good point. Out of all the social networks, Reddit has been the least interested in getting your personal identification.
Most other social networks explicitly require you to provide a phone number, or implicitly require you to register from your home’s IP address, or sometimes both.
I’m way more interested on your opinions of CEO (and Chair and CTO) Elon Musk, especially because you’d apparently rather talk about anybody but him.
Tools for Humanity… was founded six years ago with the lofty goal of providing a universal basic income to the world by offering them cryptocurrency called Worldcoin in exchange for scanning their eyeballs with an Orb.
What the fuck
“Well-run” implies that of the people running it, i.e. CEO Elon Musk. A quick search on Glassdoor reveals “CEO approval.”
I don’t expect you to speak negatively about the person who signs your paychecks, especially because he’s so obsessed with censoring social media, but when you praise vague “good leadership” and leave it at that, it does make a rational person skeptical.
If Windows is (was) good at anything, it’s maintaining backwards compatibility for longer than anyone expects them to. Never mind revolutionizing their entire file system, Windows 11 is still backwards-compatible with batch files written before we had folders.
Is that still mandatory even if I don’t want to use it as a smart TV ever?
Based on your descriptions of the integration between Windows 96 and Office, I did get the feeling you might run into even more issues if more software wasn’t installed alongside Windows as well.
I’m all Mac and Virtual Box doesn’t run on M-series hardware.
I had no idea!
And hopefully my comment didn’t come across as a dig against your article - it just promises to be a potentially fascinating follow-up. Especially when, even today, Windows Explorer feels like it added previews of files as little more than an afterthought (and occasionally as a PowerToy).
BTW I enjoyed 100% of your article, I think it’s a good sign when it leaves the reader wanting more!
This is a very good article, but this part peeved me on a petty level (as well as explaining why there’s precious little in the way of screenshots):
While I can’t find any uploads that are set to run on their website in a virtual computing session, the files are available to download if you felt like spinning up a piece of computing history.
The opportunity to do a little investigative journalism is right there, and the blog author didn’t take it
Can smart TV owners chime in with their TV OS, and whether they needed to connect to the internet to set it up?
I hope the answer is “no” across the board, but considering there’s basically no alternative to a smart TV in any big box store, I have my reservations.
I don’t trust the Trump administration’s agenda, and I certainly don’t trust a website you posted that encourages you to get 5G blockers to protect you from the “globalists.”
You don’t even need to double down on that site, which appears to be run by Mike Adams, an Alex Jones buddy who out-grifts Jones with snake oil sales. You could just admit you accept any source that says China is bad, tegardless of quality, and apologize and delete it.
(If I didn’t know better, I’d say you were a tankie yourself… doing your best strawman of what tankies complain about. Between the far right conspiracy sites, the bad sources, and the straight-up US government stuff…)
It might be me, but when you wrote
But it’s Firefox Labs, this is to test features before they’re ready. If you want to participate in that, you’re doing it to help Mozilla with Firefox, and it should thus be imperative that you also help with usage data as well. It just makes sense. Nothing to do with preference.
It sure sounded like you supported Firefox Labs features being gated
I hate to be this guy
Then don’t be. I’m not sure why you feel the need to glaze the world’s richest political agent, unless…
Are you a SpaceX employee? You’ve said this in the past.
Most people at SpaceX genuinely love the mission and will work longer hours because it’s almost a passion.
We’re pretty well-compensated too.
If you examine why the latter is an issue, maybe you’ll understand why the former also is…
I already alluded to it elsewhere, but I’d recommend reading up on the harm the zero-click internet causes
Your article cites the Trump administration (which clears your bar for what constitutes state propaganda) and additionally when we compare it to their own review for ChatGPT:
PCMag describes DeepSeek data collection as “fairly standard for chatbot data collection,” but then claims “other serious privacy concerns” before linking that [Trump admin] report.
Meanwhile “OpenAI collects a significant amount of data,” it “was not forthcoming” with data breaches, and the author doesn’t “recommend sharing anything too sensitive with ChatGPT.”
Strange DeepSeek gets the “not secure” label and ChatGPT does not.
OP is notorious for not giving a shit about privacy (and has posted conspiracy site spam before), and this article continues the trend. PCMag gives DeepSeek a 2/5 rating but Google Gemini and OpenAI’s ChatGPT get 4/5 with no heading criticizing privacy.
It gets worse: PCMag cites a Trump administration special committee report as evidence Deepseek isn’t private. I could go on for a while about how both Google and OpenAI get special treatment from the US, but hopefully it’s clear that they (like OP) only see danger stemming from the geographical location of the servers and not their actual harm.
PCMag describes DeepSeek data collection as “fairly standard for chatbot data collection,” but then claims “other serious privacy concerns” before linking that report.
Meanwhile “OpenAI collects a significant amount of data,” it “was not forthcoming” with data breaches, and the author doesn’t “recommend sharing anything too sensitive with ChatGPT.”
Strange DeepSeek gets the “not secure” label and ChatGPT does not.
deleted by creator
Is my client broken, or is the text just not visible after you cross posted? Here’s the text from OP: