mikeiz404

It’s interesting that only GET calls are metered. Is this a common thing to do?

I wonder if this is also being done to limit marketplace data being scraped with the API or limit how this data gets used by limiting low margin business models. Increasing the fees will have these effects.

The DOI address is working now

It’s been some time since I have dealt with web scrapers but it takes less resources to run a regex than it does to parse the DOM (which may have syntactically incorrect parts anyway). This can add up when running many scraping requests in parallel. So depending on your goals using a regex can be much preferred.

Two thoughts here when it comes to poisoning unwanted LLM training data traffic

1) A coordinated effort among different sites will have a much greater chance of poisoning the data of a model so long as they can avoid any post scraping deduplication or filtering.

2) I wonder if copyright law can be used to amplify the cost of poisoning here. Perhaps if the poisoned content is something which has already been shown to be aggressively litigated against then the copyright owner will go after them when the model can be shown to contain that banned data. This may open up site owners to the legal risk of distributing this content though… not sure. A cooperative effort with a copyright holder may sidestep this risk but they would have to have the means and want to litigate.

I think the post's argument is that we are on the way to something akin to China's social credit system (but not there yet).

> What we have aren't unified social credit systems…yet. They're fragmented behavioral scoring networks that don't directly communicate. Your Uber rating doesn't affect your mortgage rate, and your LinkedIn engagement doesn't determine your insurance premiums. But the infrastructure is being built to connect these systems. We're building the technical and cultural foundations that could eventually create comprehensive social credit systems. The question isn't whether we have Chinese-style social credit now (because we don't). The question is whether we're building toward it without acknowledging what we're creating.

> It is obviously social media

I get why social media could possibly be the cause but what makes you so certain it is the cause or the largest contributing factor?

Yea or also:

    Social Media getting big → larger perceived friend groups

    Social Media getting big OR
    screen time increasing OR
    phones preferencing more limited forms of communication OR
    … → more polarization

Maybe I missed it but it would have been helpful to know which confounds had been ruled out.

It could be due to a change in the PEW polling or the polling questions staying the same but the definition of terms shifting over time which caused the perceived increase in polarization. Or even the researchers’ definition of polarization which was stated as an increase in people stably identifying as either liberal or conservative. It is worth noting the article did say the PEW polling is supposed to be a stable source of data.

- The IOC is a cleared shutdown log.

- The update now clears the shutdown log each boot.

> This led to the conclusion that a cleared shutdown.log could serve as a good heuristic for identifying suspicious devices.

> With iOS 26 Apple introduced a change—either an intentional design decision or an unforeseen bug—that causes the shutdown.log to be overwritten on every device reboot instead of appended with a new entry every time, preserving each as its own snapshot. This means that any user who updates to iOS 26 and subsequently restarts their device will inadvertently erase all evidence of older Pegasus and Predator detections that might have been present in their shutdown.log.

It is unfortunate.

I think one must have a chat with our gods of capital in order to correct it. But I'm not sure they are listening.

> Enjoy a pay as you go model… No matter how big or small your business is. HP SitePrint has bundled a comprehensive support contract into a pay as you go usage rate, so you only pay for what you use.

It sounds like HP is continuing to go the subscription route to use one of these “printers”.

> "brain rot", "Thought-skipping", "primary lesion", "Cognitive Declines", ...

In general using these medical/biological metaphors doesn't seem like a good idea in things like computer science research papers and similar.

Their use forces many inaccurate comparisons (when compared in detail) and they engender human qualities to what are already forgotten to be just computer models. I get this may be done with a slight tongue-in-cheek but with research papers there is also the risk that these terms start to be adopted. And undoing that would be a much taller order in either the research community or general media.

Maybe I am just yelling at clouds.