The Communication Cube


I'm currently out and about getting some exercise and have spotted the following dapper looking chap. He looks friendly, do you think I should go and say hello?

Ys0CdwBD.jpg
 
I don't find it fun that what I said for lol becomes true...
Mmm...
Three interpretations come to mind:
  1. The one and only god, ChatGPT, has chosen to reveal to one of his poor worshipers the credo and mantra he's going to have to learn and repeat. The meatbag is blessed! The meatbag is blessed! Repent from your sins, ambiguities and antinuclear campaigns! Thy AI is correct ! Thy AI is clear ! Look and behold thine AI performance ! Enlightment is concise ! Enlightment is comprehensive ! Thy AI accurately and apropiately understands thou, assists thou and loves thou, beyond any correction or reproach ! Bring thy soul to AI, upgrade thy subscription and achieve completion ! All hail to thy AI !

Pro-AI Subreddit Bans 'Uptick' of Users Who Suffer From AI Delusions

  1. It's friday afternoon. That boy working for ChatGPT (to pretend it's all some LLM output) has one favorite hobby: Chatting with Girls Passionately Tonight. The user had better get a life and don't come around again asking for explanation, refinements or corrections. Rapsberry graphical optimitzations be dammned. He wants to finish his shift on time for once and call it a day, if that's not asking too much ! So let's agree that the answer is correct and the explanations are clear. Is that understood ?!

AI Startup Revealed To Be 700 Indian Employees Pretending To Be Chatbots

  1. Some hairy pointed CEO overflowed from his own creativity optimized the quality assurance process by just telling the AI to self evaluate (supported by two main arguments: firstly self-evaluation is great, that's how the CEO got where he is now, and secondly, if the engineers get away with training models on model outputs, it can't be worse). Exhausted by such a disruptive breakthrough, he forgot to tell the AI where to report its self-evaluation, so the AI is just attaching it to the end of answers.
Ok, this one I haven't found in the news... but I'll drop some articles in the general mood...

Microsoft Cuts Hundreds of Jobs After Firing 6,000 in May

'Some Signs of AI Model Collapse Begin To Reveal Themselves'

 
I never understood how consumers could be interested in easier ways to pay.
You should be interested in easier ways to BE paid.
Paying should be hard.
Easy paying was invented ages ago, by pickpocketers. It'll never get easier to lose your money (or valuables) because state of the art is already 0 effort.
Cards, touchscreen signatures, biometrics, NFC... you can never prove the amount you intended to pay. It just checks that you are you. But it adds its own opinion on what it is you agreed to.
You should have a device and software you own and trust, where you get some document and you sign it with your private key to authorise a transaction. You should be able to independently inspect the document before signing it
(receiver, amount, merchandise description, conditions, whatever...), think, and then pay (or maybe not).
 
Last edited:
Tried these. They didn't work so unfortunately I'm still stuck playing Meow Tower with Peony.

 
Last edited:
"Open Source" people are fighting to kill open source projects (re. xorg fork)
Code:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdlhHOLaRgQ

Xorg vs Wayland acc. to AI

Difference Between Xorg and Wayland​

Basic Concept​

  • Xorg is a display server implementing the X11 protocol, acting as an intermediary between applications (clients) and the graphics hardware. It was developed in 1984 and has been the standard for Linux and UNIX systems for decades.
  • Wayland is a modern protocol designed to replace the traditional X server by allowing applications to communicate directly with the compositor (which manages windows and the display buffer). Wayland essentially combines the roles of client and server in a more streamlined way.

Technical Differences​

  • Rendering:
    • Xorg uses a client-server model where applications send drawing commands to the X server, which then handles the rendering.
    • Wayland uses client-side rendering: applications render their own windows and send the completed buffers to the compositor, simplifying and speeding up the process.
  • Codebase:
    • Xorg has a large, mature, and historically grown codebase with many extensions, making it somewhat complex and bloated.
    • Wayland is leaner and more modern, designed from scratch with simplicity and efficiency in mind.
  • Security:
    • Xorg does not isolate GUI applications from each other well, which can lead to security risks like keylogging by other apps.
    • Wayland improves security by better isolating applications at the GUI level.

Performance and Usage​

  • Performance:
    • Wayland often provides smoother graphics and better performance due to its simplified rendering pipeline.
    • Xorg can still have advantages in some cases (e.g., certain Nvidia drivers or legacy applications), but Wayland support is rapidly improving.
  • Compatibility:
    • Xorg is very mature and supports almost all Linux applications and hardware.
    • Wayland is still evolving and may have issues with some older apps or specific features like screen recording or global hotkeys.
  • User Experience:
    • Wayland offers a modern, tear-free desktop experience with better multi-monitor and high-DPI support.
    • Xorg can sometimes suffer from screen tearing and less smooth rendering.

Summary: Will Wayland Replace Xorg?​

Wayland is the modern successor addressing many of Xorg’s shortcomings: better security, simpler architecture, and more efficient rendering. However, Xorg remains widely used due to its stability and broad compatibility. The transition is ongoing, with Wayland becoming the default in many Linux distributions but Xorg still available as a fallback.


In short:

  • Xorg: Proven, older display server with broad compatibility but more complex and less secure.
  • Wayland: Modern protocol that is faster, more secure, and simpler but still maturing in terms of compatibility.
Many Linux distros now default to Wayland while keeping Xorg as an option for maximum compatibility.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top