atrielienz

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

Google Researchers Publish Paper About How AI Is Ruining the Internet ( futurism.com )

Google researchers have come out with a new paper that warns that generative AI is ruining vast swaths of the internet with fake content — which is painfully ironic because Google has been hard at work pushing the same technology to its enormous user base.

atrielienz ,

Ironic.

""Manipulation of human likeness and falsification of evidence underlie the most prevalent tactics in real-world cases of misuse," the researchers conclude. "Most of these were deployed with a discernible intent to influence public opinion, enable scam or fraudulent activities, or to generate profit.""

Who could have seen that coming? But in all seriousness, this is exactly why so many people have been so vehemently opposed to generative AI. It's not because it can't be useful. It's literally because of how it is actively being used.

atrielienz ,

The interesting thing for me is that I own two different surface pro 7 tablets. I have one for work and one for home (now that work doesn't require me to bring my own device anymore). The work surface has windows 10 pro on it. My home one doesn't, The difference is very interesting. The IT team have disabled a lot of stuff on my work surface that I don't even have access to on my home unit. I don't often have bugs from updates breaking things at work. I do at home though which is enough for me to perhaps upgrade the windows key on my home unit someday. If I don't install linux first which is a possibility.

atrielienz ,

If the size of the pixel 9 is good I'll upgrade. Other than that I'm good.

atrielienz ,

Is this the same sensor they use on their pixel tablet?

atrielienz ,

What kind of sensor does the pixel tablet have in the power button. How does it differ from the one in the pixel 9?

atrielienz ,

Comparatively though the pro and regular size of the 7 do not give me hope. The 8 is fine but I haven't been reading up on the 9 rumours yet.

why isn't anyone calling for Trump to drop out.

I get it, Biden is old and that's a problem, but why doesn't anyone seem to have a problem with the fact that Trump is almost the same age, has 34 felonies, raped at least 2 women, went to Epstein's Island 11 times, sexualized his own daughter, stole classified documents, aligned himself with Xi and Putin, and can't remember...

atrielienz ,

I don't actually think that statement is true. Polls are notoriously wrong all the time, and the members of the Democratic Party requesting he drop out are doing so because they're afraid to say otherwise. I'll give you an example. Members of the Republican party notably were very critical of Trump until they realised that to continue in the political sphere they were going to have to get along to get along when it became clear he was the front runner.

The members of the DNC who are asking for Biden to step down are doing so even though they know that no other possible candidate is likely to win. They did the same with Bernie Sanders in 2016. They aren't worried that he'll lose the popular vote. They're worried he'll lose Electoral College votes because some of them are apparently still on the fence. If they wanted to put forth another candidate they would have already. Who have they put forward to put on the ticket? No one. Because they don't have anyone else either. For them it's a no win situation and they're scared so they're trying to cover their own asses.

atrielienz ,

I seem to remember motorola having a phone awhile back (2016?) that had basically a magsafe battery pack that would just lay on the back of it. And a speaker and such. It was gimmicky given how uncomfortable the naked phone would be to hold in your hand, but it was cool that such a thing was possible.

atrielienz , (edited )

It is absolutely highly concerning. That said, there's way too many people who haven't read the official ruling who are panicking instead of advocating for people to vote to keep Biden in office and prepare another viable candidate for that office once his second term is up. Because the only way to get these idiots off the SCOTUS is to elect non-conservative presidents who can win. And that only happens if people both vote and lobby for what they want. We need better electoral college regulations. We need ranked voting. We need the people to lobby to further limit the government because obviously this is what happens when we don't.

This ruling, coupled with the whole "Biden is too old, he should step down" BS is exactly the kind of propaganda concoction that will lead to Trump being re-elected in November if we don't do something.

Do I think this is a way for a President to sanction and enact the murder of political rivals? Under certain circumstances, yes. Do I think the average citizen should be worried about the President signing their death warrant? No.

You have to understand that we've had alphabet agencies for a long time and the President literally could use certain pretexts to kill a person if they wanted so long as they did it a specific way. That has not changed just because of this ruling and that's a big factor people should look at. There's a reason former Presidents haven't been prosecuted for drone strikes. Technically they could have been held accountable in a court of law before that. But we've known for a long time that in all actuality the law only works that way if you're poor or if you're going up against someone else who's independently wealthy. That's why Epstein is dead after all. Not because he trafficked young girls. But because his imprisonment put other rich people in danger. Sam Bankmanfried isn't in prison because he stole money. He's in prison because he stole from other rich people. Same with Elizabeth Holmes.

When Trump was in office, I need you to understand that the government (the people who guard national secrets) actually considerered him a threat and limited his ability to do damage by not telling him things. We would have been much worse off if they hadn't.

As a result, the apparatus of the government is not a monolith, just like the apparatus of the military or even just the US as a whole. It's made up of people. And we've limped along this far because we could rely on them not to do certain things. But what Trump was able to get away with by being elected and being in office? This is the fallout of that.

Your statement that the president can "personally" violate any law without criminal liability isn't correct. Here's a direct quote from the ruling "Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts."

"As for a President’s unofficial acts, there is no immunity. Although Presidential immunity is required for official actions to ensure that the President’s decision making is not distorted by the threat of future litigation stemming from those actions, that concern does not support immunity for unofficial conduct. Clinton, 520 U. S., at 694, and n. 19. The separation of powers does not bar a prosecution predicated on the President’s unofficial acts."

On its face this ruling admits there is a such thing as an unofficial act. The problem is that the SCOTUS should not be allowed to make this decision without checks or balances in place. I.e. if they are making the deduction that a President has immunity, they must cede the determination of such acts that have immunity vs those that don't to another regulatory body. That's the disturbing part to me.

This also makes me question what the point is of the impeachment process specifically because of this passage from the same ruling:

"When the President exercises such author ity, Congress cannot act on, and courts cannot examine, the President’s actions. It follows that an Act of Congress—either a specific one targeted at the President or a generally applicable one—may not criminalize the President’s actions within his exclusive constitutional power. Neither may the courts adjudicate a criminal prosecution that examines such Presidential actions."

Technically an impeachment is not a criminal trial. But that passage doesn't specify the scope. So it could be used to argue that impeachment (while not a criminal proceeding) is an examination of the Presidents actions that potentially would not be allowed. And since the impeachment process is a check and balance for the presidential office, that's not okay.

atrielienz , (edited )

I'm a bit bothered that people aren't going to the web to read the ruling in full. They're relying heavily on dissenting SCOTUS member's statements and the media. I'm also disheartened at the number of people who don't know their rights, don't understand the government's functions in society, and don't understand that the constitution is meant to be a living document that restricts what the government can do, not what its citizens can. Of course the number of people who don't know what's in the constitution and its amendments is also very high.

It wasn't that terribly long ago that we didn't have presidential term limits. There's absolutely a way forward with further amendments to the constitution which is something we as a people should also lobby for.

Edit: Speak of the devil: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4750735-joe-morelle-amendment-supreme-court-immunity-ruling/

atrielienz ,

Those things are already happening and will get worse if we don't lobby and vote. This has been the vendetta of the conservative party I. This country for several decades. They have been taking small chunks out of every regulatory legislative government branch and agency for literal decades with the intent that eventually they could undermine the government process enough to get what they want.

The reason I said "citizens worried about the President signing their death warrant* is because that's literally what headlines have been saying and I see a lot of those same headlines parotted both on Lemmy in these discussion threads, and in other web forums in relation to the topic of criminal charges being brought against a sitting or former president.

We should have always been worried about our rights. We should have always been lobbying to further limit the government in what it can do against the people. Instead we haven't made a new amendment to the constitution since '92, and we are Leary of doing so and keeping it a living document because we fear all the things the other side will do, and they're doing them anyway.

atrielienz ,

They aren't though. They say in the document that they are the final word on what is within the scope of official acts. So it's not even a separate regulating body purpose built for that. It's lower courts making a decision and the SCOTUS deciding if it is right and wrong and having the final say.

atrielienz ,

Reading even the first few pages would be preferable to the fear mongering and panic in my opinion. If you're getting a pared down version from Cornell law, fine. If it's coming from fox news or vox media, I don't think that should be the end of anyone's endeavours to understand what is going on.

atrielienz ,

Yes. And to be clear I don't think this is a good thing. I'm actually very much against the courts deciding the preview of what is lawful conduct for the president within his duties to the Constitution and what is not.

The justices of the supreme court ruled that Trump was immune and effectively above the law while being president. What is now stopping Biden from bringing a gun to the next debate?

If inciting an insurrection towards their own government is an action without legal repercussions, I don't see how the law would be less lenient about straight up firing a gun at an opponent....

atrielienz ,

The answer really is that desperation is a design feature not a flaw. The system is working as intended. And people who speak up about it don't get silenced. They just get caught out fighting to survive unless they're already very rich. So for every Bernie Sanders you've got thousands of poor people who would fight for the same but not at the expense of feeding their families and losing their homes.

atrielienz ,

But that doesn't sanction military members to break the law or the UCMJ. And that's the point. They do not have immunity, qualified or otherwise. The order would be unlawful simply because of the issuing parties bias and personal gain from the act.

I'm not saying there are not people in the military who would follow this type of order. I'm saying that they don't have the protections or immunity, qualified or otherwise, and honestly, a presidential pardon doesn't do anything for them if the state decides to prosecute them. Plus military members are basically the only people in the US subject to legal double jeopardy because they can be tried by the military separately from state and federal law.

atrielienz ,

That conflicts not just with other established law, but also with what I actually said and what the ruling says. The problem with it is that the order can't be considered lawful regardless of what the Supreme court ruled because it doesn't fit all the criteria of a lawful order.

"What is considered a lawful order in the military?
It must not conflict with the statutory or constitutional rights of the person receiving the order. Finally, it must be a specific mandate to do or not to do a specific act. In sum, an order is presumed lawful if it has a valid military purpose and is a clear, precise, narrowly drawn mandate."

https://ucmjdefense.com/resources/military-offenses/the-lawfulness-of-orders.html

One other thing is that you're quoting dissenting members of the SCOTUS, not the ruling itself. That's a single interpretation of it, and one deliberately intended to alarm people so that they push back against it.

atrielienz , (edited )

Before smartphones we had snake and Tetris on non smart phones and we liked it. Before that books and news papers were popular.

Tesla is recalling its Cybertruck for the fourth time to fix problems with trim pieces that can come loose and front windshield wipers that can fail | The new recalls each affect over 11,000 trucks ( apnews.com )

The company says in the documents that the front windshield wiper motor controller can stop working because it’s getting too much electrical current. A wiper that fails can cut visibility, increasing the risk of a crash. The Austin, Texas, company says it knows of no crashes or injuries caused by the problem....

atrielienz ,

On the mach E, my understanding is there's a panel where you hook up a jump box that supplies power to those circuits to allow you to use your key fob to open the door. But there's no bladed key to manually unlock the car. So technically there's a failsafe but it's not ideal. And I agree it ought not be allowed.

atrielienz ,

There's a little panel you can use the uncut key blade to pop out and a power and ground wire in them that's accessible outside the vehicle. Of course that requires you to have a jump box or another car and some leads. I don't know who needs to hear this but stay real close to civilization if you drive one of these. Don't get stranded in no man's land.

I Will Fucking Piledrive You If You Mention AI Again — Ludicity ( ludic.mataroa.blog )

How stupid do you have to be to believe that only 8% of companies have seen failed AI projects? We can't manage this consistently with CRUD apps and people think that this number isn't laughable? Some companies have seen benefits during the LLM craze, but not 92% of them. 34% of companies report that generative AI specifically...

atrielienz ,

I'm inclined to believe, based on this thread, that you and the person you're replying to didn't read the article because the person who wrote it and most of the replies to it are not saying "LLM's are garbage and have no benefits".

The post is specifically calling out companies that have jumped on the "AI LLM" train who are trying to force feed it into every single project and service regardless of whether it will be useful or beneficial or not. And they will not listen to people working in the field who tell them no it will not be beneficial.

The hype is what people are upset about because companies are selling something that is useful in selective cases as something that will be useful to everyone universally for just about everything and they're making products worse.

Just look at Google and their implementation of AI LLM'S in search results. That's a product that isn't useful unless it's accurate. And it was not ready to be a public facing service. In their other products it's promising more but actually breaking or removing features that users have been using for years. That's why people are upset. This isn't even taking into account the theft that went on of people's work to get these LLM'S trained.

This is literally just about companies having more FOMO than sense. This is about them creating and providing to the public broken interactions of products filled with the newest "tech marvel" to increase sales or stock price while detrimentally affecting the common user.

For every case of an LLM being useful there are several where it's not. That's the point.

atrielienz , (edited )

Which makes the point that while AI LLM's can be useful and can be improved, hamfisting them into every product you make as a company because you have FOMO is ill advised and aggravating, especially when you pay people to be subject matter experts in the field and they tell you it's a bad idea. That's what the article said in some very verbose language. Your attention span must be severely lacking because you couldn't read the article and glean that simple point from the words on the page. I read it and it was entertaining and insightful.

You seem like someone who might need paragraphs to be a single sentence.

atrielienz ,

I've actually gone out of my way to avoid it but that has nothing to do with the accuracy of the results (although I would need those results to be accurate), and everything to do with avoiding ads and using the search web function to find very specific and detailed information rather than a summary.

In my short experience with the AI features for search specifically, I have experienced not being able to see the source of that information without having to click through and scroll down or continue a conversation with prompts. I don't want that. It very often slows down my work flow and that's the intention. To keep me on the page making additional queries and looking at more ads.

I have experienced Gemini with my phone though and it's actively worse than google assistant and home assistant in a lot of ways. Features that have allowed me for years to control smart devices and have been broken or unreliable. More so than the results of the Sonos lawsuit.

I want my devices to work. I don't want to have a conversation with a device to turn on lights or find out what the weather is like. Bottom line, the point of my comment was that (obnoxious to you or not), nobody is under attack for using AI products.

atrielienz ,

Did they need a slash s for this? Did they? Because people like you make me believe they needed a slash s. Like. Obviously this was a sarcastic comment because the original comment they responded to was horribly fallible. There are whole industries built on the idea that an industry can be destroyed by liability. It's literally why we have liability insurance. So when someone responds to that comment with an equally fallible statement that is clearly meant to be sarcastic we just ignore that because we feel that their statement is wrong? What even is this.

atrielienz ,

They have a logical point though. On the Ukranian war videos side we know that the news has to blur certain things for public decency or safety etc.

On the 3D printing side we know that while these videos are definitely educational, the point is that such an education can be used in a very horrible way.

IUD might be how their phone's keyboard corrected, or they might have just swapped the acronyms. It's more important that you knew what he meant and I think you're dismissing it out of hand.

When the internet first became popular there was a whole thing about kids having access to the materials to make a bomb with instructions. Took some bookstores down with them. Anarchist cookbook moral panic everywhere.So yeah this has been a thing for a long time.

atrielienz ,

It is if that's how you think about it. But over time the thinking behind that has changed. Because these types of people are.in our military and they think most military members think like them. By proxy that means they'd be on the side of the "militia".

atrielienz , (edited )

A gun is a technological marvel of a thing. Scientifically they are really very interesting. How they work is kind of ingenious, and their history and how they have so drastically changed the course of all history is fascinating.

I don't want to say that these people probably are all in that boat. But being a gun nut who wants to shoot someone isn't the only reason to find something interesting. I feel the same way about fireworks and nuclear bombs. Looking at the work that had to be done by so many people in order to make a nuclear bomb and calculate what it would and could do? That's as cool and intriguing as a space shuttle or an oil rig drill.

3D printing is also really cool in and of itself.

atrielienz ,

I was in the military. I took the oath. What I'm saying is, if you don't think there are MAGAT idiots in the military (a lot of them), please understand they did a threat assessment of military members while Donald Trump was running for President the first time, and decided to make a military wide training specifically to educate us about that oath and remind us who what we took it to defend. So yes. I absolutely do know some people who are all for militia fighting the government who are still military members.

atrielienz ,

The median age for an A&P licensed plane tech is 55. We'll welcome you to the ranks anytime.

atrielienz ,

This comment directly speaks to your lack of understanding of how airline maintenance works. The point though is there are a shortage of maintenance personnel in the industry. People are retiring all the time and nobody is filling those billets once they leave. And airlines don't just have a maintenance crew at every airport because there's not enough, and it wouldn't be cost effective. Be as angry as you want that airlines are running on such terrible margins that they can't have a backup plane. But do understand that this is not the fault of the maintenance personnel.

atrielienz ,

Did it ever occur to you that they don't just have maintenance personnel at every airport? Because what I'm saying is that no airline in the world has maintenance personnel at every airport.

Spirit, Frontier and Allegiant are Airbus only and would require an Airbus tech. Airbus planes are pretty decent on that the A19-A321 planes are pretty much exactly the same in parts and configuration except that some are longer and or wider than others. On the other side of things Southwest has only Boeing planes, mostly 737 and 747.

Pretty much every other airline has a mix of different planes (Boeing, Airbus, and Bombardier, Embraer). To do what you're talking about every airline that flies more than one plane would have to have a technician for each of those plane types on the ground at every airport they fly to. That's 5000 airports, with at least two technicians per airport (assuming they only have one flight in and out of there at a time which is ludicrous). The average number of flights going in and out of any one airport at a time. Daily there are about 45,000 flights per day per FAA statistics not including private flights.

At Delta's hub in Atlanta, there are around 2100-2700 flights per day. Delta says they have about 6,400 AMT's worldwide One singular airport out of 242 airports that Delta flies to. 24 hours a day for most airports. They would be required to keep at least 8 people per airport per average number of flights leaving or arriving per at the same time. Let's say that at their hub they only have 5 planes on the ground at any given time ( a gross miscalculation of how many planes fly into their hub, but the math is cleaner). Delta has 4 different plane manufacturers's planes in their fleet. That's 4 mechanics on an 8 or 12 hour shift multiplied by 5 planes let's say per average turn around time of 30 minutes. You'd need 20 techs
At every single solitary airport Delta flies to. Per shift. Supplied by the airline. It's a logistical nightmare and this number balloons when you realise just how.many departures and arrivals there are and at what intervals at pretty much any major airport. 9,640 AMT's assuming 12 hour shifts. Just for domestic USA flights, not including planes that are down for maintenance outside regular maintenance schedule. When the fleet only emplyes 6,400 AMT's world wide.

I cannot stress this enough, but you're making a lot of assumptions here. And you don't think it's an unrealistic expectation specifically because you have no idea how any of this works.

atrielienz ,

Because you don't understand what an A&P licensed Technician is or what the certification means. It also means you likely didn't understand what you were told about what was causing the delay.

By that I mean they probably initially had someone working on that plane who was new to being a tech. Which tracks because outside of recruiting from the military, a lot of AMT's recruited to the business are fresh out of highschool or college because that's when it's cheapest to hire them, and considering that older technicians are retiring every day. That technician was told there was a specific problem (let's say a fan cowl door won't latch). They open that door up to find that the reason it won't latch is because the latch is broken. To replace the latch they remove some parts, and then find that the reason it's broken is because some safety wire is broken off a bolt somewhere and wedged itself in such a way that it stressed that latch til it broke. Not only do they have to figure out where that safety wire came from, they have to do further teardown and inspection to make sure that there's no other damage. Unless you want to randomly lose an engine at 10k+ feet in the air where you can't pull over to the side of the road. And that's where being a subject matter expert on that particular model platform of plane would be preferred. Because while any AMT could find where that safety wire came from, not any AMT could do it on the Line without delaying a plane.

And that's why I said you were blaming Technicians. Because you were blaming Techs for the delay. Which in actuality was probably caused by something outside their control. Have a nice life dude. Your opinion is trash.

atrielienz ,

Can I ask exactly what you expected them to do? The managers or gate staff or whoever?

I ask because delays when they happen are usually tied to federal regulations about who can fly, what can fly, in what condition, in what weather, etc. So if they found something to be mechanically wrong with your plane and not fixable in a way that is airworthy, generally that plane would be grounded and the airline would then have to scramble to find accommodation.

While I'll grant you that airlines overbook pretty much every plane in the event that people don't show up, and that's a scummy practice, I also fully understand that this decision was definitely not made by some.manager actively at the airport. This was a decision from the executive suite of the company.

I don't have good things to say about flying United, American, or Delta, even. I'm a bit biased about Southwest. But I haven't really had any problems with them. Believe it or not, same with Alaska despite the recent bad press.

I have been delayed many a time. I recognise that it can be devastatingly inconvenient and problematic. It can cost customers significant amounts of money and time.

I'm not saying it's unreasonable to be angry. I'm saying that the airport staff who likely would have related this information to you (pilot, flight attendants, gate staff) also aren't responsible. Further, the person who tasked that AMT or those AMT's to work on the plane you were on is likely doing their best to utilise staff efficiently and effectively to keep planes in the air because that's their job, and that job becomes exponentially harder when planes are grounded.

Your ire seems to be directed towards the airline at large, and it seems like you had an expectation of what would and should happen that I feel is unreasonable given what I know.

You haven't really made it clear what you expected except the things I have spoken to in previous comments in this thread. But even if you didn't mean it that way, what you basically said is that the AMT wasn't qualified (which isn't true) to be working on the model of plane that they were servicing, and that caused a delay. Which is why I said you were blaming the AMT. The fact that the manager of that AMT is also probably an AMT as well is something you seem to have glossed over.

The other thing I want to point out is that the cost of keeping planes on standby in the case of mechanical issues grounding a different plane would be astronomical, and that cost would probably triple or quadruple the cost of your plane ticket. At an airlines hub airport that might be feasible. But airport hangar space is limited and the run on costs of doing so are so cost prohibitive to most customers (not to mention the lack of AMT's available to make it happen), that I just don't understand what you expect a better result to look like.

We're not talking about shade tree mechanics on their garage tearing down an engine here. We're talking about highly trained AMT's who are part of a maintenance apparatus that is heavily heavily regulated by the federal government.

atrielienz ,

When you ask assistant to set a timer it may hang up. Most of the time that works (for me). Gemini can't do that or couldn't do that about a month ago when I was seeing articles about it. There's key functionality of assistant that Gemini is just bad at. Ask it to launch an app for you? It will bring up a search of app launchers. It will not launch Gmail.

atrielienz ,

It's free with my YouTube music sub. I was grandfathered into the cheapest price from the Google play music launch. I like a lot of tech and science videos and I watch YouTube for that. Worth it to me.

atrielienz ,

Which doesn't make sense on Lemmy because it's not algorithm based. But is probably a muscle memory reaction from using Reddit or similar.

atrielienz ,

That's fair. I didn't know all that.

atrielienz ,

The onion articles? Or just all the other random shit they've shoveled into their latest and greatest LLM?

atrielienz ,

This is perhaps the most ironic thing about the whole reddit data scraping thing and Spez selling out the user data of reddit to LLM'S. Like. We spent so much time posting nonsense. And then a bunch of people became mods to course correct subreddits where that nonsense could be potentially fatal. And then they got rid of those mods because they protested. And now it's bots on bots on bots posting nonsense. And they want their LLM'S trained on that nonsense because reasons.

atrielienz ,

Yeah. I was including Reddit shit posts in the "random shit they've shoveled into their latest and greatest LLM". It's nuts to me that they put basically no actual thought into the repercussions of using Reddit as a data set without anything to filter that data.

atrielienz ,

I don't even think hallucinations is the right word for this. It's got a source. It is giving you information from that source. The problem is it's treating the words at that source as completely factual despite the fact that they are not. Hallucinations from what I've read actually is more like when it queries it's data set, can't find an answer, and then generates nonsense in order to provide an answer it doesn't have. Don't think that's the same thing.

atrielienz ,

I understand the gist but I don't mean that it's actively like looking up facts. I mean that it is using bad information to give a result (as in the information it was trained on says 1+1 =5 and so it is giving that result because that's what the training data had as a result. The hallucinations as they are called by the people studying them aren't that. They are when the training data doesn't have an answer for 1+1 so then the LLM can't do math to say that the next likely word is 2. So it doesn't have a result at all but it is programmed to give a result so it gives nonsense.

Google Search’s “udm=14” trick lets you kill AI search for good | Ars Technica ( arstechnica.com )

Tack "&udm=14" on to the end of a normal search, and you'll be booted into the clean 10 blue links interface. While Google might not let you set this as a default, if you have a way to automatically edit the Google search URL, you can create your own defaults.

atrielienz ,

Duckduckgo suffers a lot of the same problems as google and other search engines. It's just not getting progressively worse as fast as google. It's still been getting worse and worse as time has gone on. I really dislike people who just point to another search engine like it's the end all be all and don't or won't acknowledge that each one has problems and a lot of the problems overlap significantly. None of that fixes the problem or makes any of these companies backtrack on their terrible implementation of anti-user/anti-consumer policies.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines