Even assuming we’re okay with using AI for language learning - then why would anyone pay for Duolingo instead of the many LLMs that people already use and pay for?
They’ve alienated their customer base hard. And this marketing video pretending they are siding with the users and against “their corporate overlords” is horribly tone deaf.
In my view it’s a Linux subsystem for Windows.
Why the name is the other way around, I’ll never understand.
Fine, whatever. You can’t ever search on SearxNG without paying. You win.
I’ve seen your comment history and it’s full of negative comments because you’re just trolling everyone. My only mistake in this conversation has been to reply to you when you’ve only been saying things you don’t even believe yourself just to troll me. Sigh.
You’re still missing the point, you’re comparing hosting vs using.
If you wanted to host Google, you’d have to spend a fuckton of money on servers. If you want to host Lemmy, it’s unfortunate that you don’t own a computer (this puts things into perspective) but the requirements are absolutely minimal.
If you want to use Google, you have to pay the same as for using Lemmy, or searxNG, zero. However with Google you will pay with your data, whereas with SearxNG you have the option to donate, and the option to self host, if you choose. You don’t have the option to self-host something like Google unless your last name is something like Bezos.
You can host lemmy on an Android phone but not on an iPhone, which is pretty locked down - you’d have to convince Tim Cook to open the OS.
You can install it fairly easily on a library computer as long as you get permission from the library. You can’t install things on computers you don’t have admin rights to; other examples of computers you can’t use to host Lemmy are an ATM on the street, a self checkout machine at the supermarket, or the cockpit computer of an Airbus A350.
I (rather obviously) am talking there about the Google search service, not a single query, as Google doesn’t disappear after a single query.
I’m not sure what you’re pointing at though? Surely hosting Google search is more expensive than hosting Lemmy when you’re insinuating otherwise?
You’re funny. 😂 What I actually think is that your mind reading skills are terrible because I never said anything even remotely similar to that.
Enlighten me, why do you think I can’t tell the difference? Is it because as a maintainer I want to provide something for free? Do you see “consumers” of free content as leeches?
Yes I do. I’m totally the one who can’t understand that “free” is a nuanced concept and something can be free when there are costs but they are externalised.
Exhausting. If you don’t consider anything in the world is free, why did you bother saying Lemmy isn’t free?
Plus this argument is rubbish, it’s like saying “my car isn’t free, nor is the road, nor is my petrol, so the beach isn’t free”.
Just because you have to buy clothes to go out for a walk, it doesn’t make it any less free.
What are you trying to argue here? That the term “free” shouldn’t exist because in a capitalist society everything has dependencies? (I still don’t get how that relates to my original post which was purely about doing business with corporations).
Then fine, Lemmy isn’t free, neither is the sun, or going for a walk. You win. Good day sir.
Don’t run it on a raspberry pi, run it on the same computer you use to access the Google search you are happy to call “free”.
Edit: Actually yes, both this and the healthcare need to be free - otherwise you’re grossly misunderstanding one of the key parts of the mission of open source. I pay for this so that whoever can’t afford it can access for exactly zero. Same for the healthcare - you might say it’s “not free” and everyone should contribute but what to you or me is nothing, could mean that grandma doesn’t get to eat. So yeah, free access needs to be a possibility. That’s the mission. I contribute to open source software and donate where I can so others who don’t have the knowledge or money can access it for free. There can’t be a price.
Uh, what a weird message. It’s not only unrelated to what I said but it reads like an attempt to twist my words. On top of it, it’s totally wrong: Lemmy is free. I can self host Lemmy on a raspberry pi for exactly 0€.
The instance I use… Is also free. I donate because I choose to, but if my friend can’t afford to donate they can still use the instance. Nobody is profiting from it.
What I did talk about is products and doing business with corporations. With Lemmy there’s no product, whether you pay or not. With SearxNG (which many people self host, and again, is free) you’re not the product, regardless of how much you pay.
That’s what I was replying to - your comment is way off the mark and very condescending: I don’t need to be mansplained that I should donate to the software I already donate to. Note donate rather than pay for.
That’s only when doing business with corporations, but there’s also the option of open source (e.g. SearxNG).
Or do you consider yourself the product when using Lemmy?
It’s okay. We can all play that game. I’ve replaced my use of Duolingo with AI.
Pro tip: have as your “system prompt” in your LLM of choice “at the end of every query, include me a short Swedish relates to my prompt”. No need for Duolingo.
“There are some bad things on the internet”
“Just… Don’t use the internet?”
I’ve only started using Storygraph recently (which I also like) but I’d consider a federated alternative. Does anybody know whether its possible to migrate the history from SG to Bookwyrm?
Yeah and at this rate, soon enough Israel will completely run out of Gazans to exterminate!
Something I find incredibly weird about US company culture is how they talk about overtime like it’s a good thing.
“Our employees worked weekends, days and nights to make this happen! We wouldn’t have succeeded without people who are willing to give up their personal lives!”
I hope they not only succeed but get shares. Doing weekends or nights for a company you don’t (partially) own feels like a con.
Sort of. It just depends on how much the person needs to control the vehicle.
The easiest example I can think of: Imagine lorries traveling along a motorway, and they can do that autonomously because it’s “easy”, and when they get into a city a remote operator needs to drive them manually into the depot.
Each operator could easily drive 4 or 5 lorries, if only one of those is entering a city at a time. Instead of needing a driver per truck, you only need drivers for the maximum number of trucks that might be entering cities at the same time. For a fleet of 30, that could be 5 drivers.
For things like mining, where safety regulations mean that you want to avoid having people in the mine as much as possible, even having one driver for every haul truck (so yeah, regular driving with extra steps) could be economically profitable if it means you can reduce some other, potentially expensive safety controls.
What you’re saying absolutely makes sense. However as someone with ADHD I couldn’t relate any less, I wish I could get addicted to something like that and not lose interest after ten minutes!