

I wonder if they’re using any of the *arrs to do this since its a faster response time to get into the peerlist as quick as possible before anyone can complete the initial download.
Our News Team @ 11 with host Snot Flickerman
Yes, I can hear you, Clem Fandango!


I wonder if they’re using any of the *arrs to do this since its a faster response time to get into the peerlist as quick as possible before anyone can complete the initial download.


The ambrosia of the Juggalo


A decent copy that someone was kind of enough to remove watermarks from. Still not sure it’s a great thing to be sharing here, but I don’t know how peertube works or if that makes it safer.


It definitely is taboo in conservative hell-holes like the USA
But I am glad the rest of the planet isn’t so fucked


For Lemmy it’s “verification beans” and you’re not allowed to poop for three days.
Some folks browse using Tor or other high-privacy respecting browsers, in which things like NoScript are a default.
Anyway, yeah, NoScript is still pretty popular and if I recall correctly you can whitelist and regex with it. I just use the same functionality to disable javascript that is in uBlock Origin, personally.
It’s interesting to me because while it’s mostly correct in each instance I tried it (phone, desktop) it actually gets some pertinent information incorrect.
For one, it only recognized the one monitor I had the browser open on, I have four monitors, so it got the resolution correct for a single monitor, but fails to capture the others, and so technically if I opened it on a different monitor with a different resolution (I had two that have different resolutions), that aspect of the fingerprint should change.
Secondly, when I went to this link from my cell phone it registered it as me typing the link in by hand while on PC it correctly registered where the link originated from (here on lemmy). Although I was using Jerboa on Android so perhaps it can’t read link origin from Jerboa (which is good).
Finally, it registers my Wayland session as X11, although I’m not sure if that’s a current limitation of browsers since Wayland isn’t the dominant compositor yet and perhaps hasn’t been added to browser user-agent info yet.


Interesting, but it also looks like it might be a paid service.


Many were increasingly of the opinion that they’d all made a big mistake in making text editors in the first place. And some said that even making operating systems had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have built computers at all.
rolling down the street smoking cock
sipping on cum & spooge
laid back
with my mind on my bussy and my bussy on my mind
Men have nipples too ( T _ T )
Where the nipple bros at.
This is the only reference I can find to said connection anywhere, so I’d put this squarely in the rumor category. Further, none of the names in Mambo No. 5 match the names any of Clinton’s accusers, only Monica.
Tuning out Monica
Lyrics turned out to be a problem in choosing the convention theme song. Convention producers had selected Lou Bega’s “Mambo No. 5” because it was up-tempo and popular, like “The Macarena,” the Democrats’ convention theme in 1996.
But the chorus of “Mambo No. 5” refers to a girl named Monica.
Convention planners initially thought they could just rewrite the lyric, but late on the eve of the convention, they re-thought the whole idea.
“That’s out now,” said Wheeler, whose orchestra rehearsed the song. “That will not be played at all.”
Convention producers are now looking for another song - one just as catchy, but without a catch - that will rally the party faithful, inspire the crowd and get the campaign off on the right note.
20 years age you were 13, now you are 33, which is the same age as Stu Pickles (pictured front row, left column) in the original Rugrats. The original first season run of Rugrats was 35 years ago, so you’re also younger than the show itself.
“So uh I have this idea for a cartoon or something. Um, it’s like there’s these fucked up kids…”
“Uh huh”
“…and like through the power of, of…”
“…understanding.”
“Oh yeah it can totally be understanding or like forgiveness or something umm they like overcome all their fears, and then they turn out totally fine…”
I wish this was just a cartoon so I could be like:
“This is real as fuck, I love the way they don’t give up!”
Tweet about it:
“More stories like this! So important!”
But it really happened OH GOD IT REALLY HAPPENED. WHAT THE FUCK.


I’d tell my family to save the money and just bury me in a mass grave, especially if I had been drafted into that fucking war.


Gee I hope he doesn’t jack off


I’m not saying words really loudly in my head while getting coffee. I just read the plots as I normally do, and make coffee as I normally do. It feels like magic.
Hey guy it probably feels like magic because you’re completely overselling where we’re at in terms of this kind of technology and we definitely aren’t anywhere close to an AI casually reading our casual thoughts and doing research based on them.
Further, yes, yikes, this is very fucking dystopian when you consider the AIs this is meant to interface with are corporate owned, meaning corporations will have ownership over your thoughts. You don’t think they’re going to let you retains rights once a copy of is it in their servers? At the very least they will give themselves certain rights over the copy of your thoughts, and you may not even be able to easily access a copy yourself. It just feels insane to even consider to freely give my thoughts as data up to a private company.
What would this mean for someone who has issues with intrusive thoughts? Would the AI report them to authorities as a danger to themselves or others because of their thoughts? Intrusive thoughts they cannot control or stop?
Will it report you to HR because you had some mildly dirty thoughts about an attractive coworker? It just seems like such a massive risk because humans are much less in control of their thoughts than we think.
Unrelated, I like that “glitch” is a yiddish word and makes me think of an old jewish guy kvetching about his “glitching” computer.
…for what, specifically?