kevincox

joined 5 years ago
[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago

If not USB why USB-shaped?

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Excuse me! Canada won it last year.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

Honestly AI has been used for moderation for decades. The newer models will be quite effective. It could be very useful for limiting lower effort spam. Sure dedicated spammers will figure it out and get by it but as the models get better that will get harder.

Of course like every use of probabilistic technology like AI it should still go to human review. We shouldn't be shadowbanning people because computer said no. But holding suspicious posts in a review queue for the moderators seems quite reasonable (much like they already do with their current systems).

Honestly this sounds more like an investor update showing how innovative we are using modern technology and how it is going to really improve the platform and stonks will go up up up than any meaningful change to their current moderation systems.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Looks like a cu​nt to me.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago

Only the poor people.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Reminds me of this page which I can't believe isn't a parody: Where to Watch Pokémon Episodes & Movies | Pokemon.com

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

declaring multiple variables is less error-prone than in C. In C, the following declares x to be a pointer, but (surprisingly at first!) y to be a normal integer:

int* x, y;

Whereas the equivalent in Go does what you’d expect, declaring both to be pointers:

var x, y *int

I don't think this is a related at all. C could have easily decided that the definition makes both x and y pointers. They just decided not to so that you can declare more variables on one line by being able to do int x, *y, **z, .... It is more flexible.

Similarly that Go line could have been parsed like var x, (y*) int if they wanted to. They just made a different choice.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Trump doesn't appear to care much about the law.

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Why only streaming services? Why not target the volume of any ads within content that contains audio? While we are at it why not say that the add can't be significantly more bright?