hedgehog @ hedgehog @ttrpg.network

Posts

3

Comments

833

Joined

2 yr. ago

It doesn’t really seem like net metering is sustainable.

Not sure why you think that.

Say for example someone generates the same amount of electricity they use, in that case they pay $0 for electricity even though the grid has to take the burden of storing the electricity until they use it later in the day.

The grid isn’t storing their energy - it’s sending it to other customers, meaning that non-sustainable, polluting energy sources don’t have to be generated.

The only time that’s not true is when the net load on the grid dips below zero. According to the duck curve graph from the article, it does appear to be very briefly dipping for a very brief time period each day. At that point it could make sense to store the rest, but if the grid doesn’t have storage capacity then any excess is “wasted,” but at that point the grid engages in a process known as “curtailment,” which means it rejects the excess, meaning that nobody gets credit later for energy that isn’t used now.

Also, curtailment is often not because the grid itself is over-supplied, but because specific regions are over-supplied and the grid lacks transmission lines from them to regions where demand is higher.

in that case they pay $0 for electricity

True under NEM 1.0, but NEM 2.0 also includes “non-bypassable charges” - components of pulling from the grid that cannot be offset by what they contribute. Those charges are roughly 5% as far as I can tell, meaning that if they pulled $300 worth of energy from the grid and sent back $300 worth (or more), they’d still owe $15.

The article explains the infographic and adds a lot more context.

The amount of arsenic depends on location - if you’re in a region that has standards on arsenic levels, like the EU, UK, or the US, then you’re probably fine, but the levels may be higher than what’s considered safe for children. This method would allow you to reduce the levels by around 50%, and since the levels for children are a bit under half of what’s acceptable for adults, that’s likely to make it safe for them.

The time savings are relative to other methods for reducing arsenic content, like cooking it with excess water (like a 12:1 ratio) and then discarding the excess, as this method allows you to use a rice cooker for the remaining time and to cook with a much smaller water:rice ratio, even accounting for the discarded water.

Sorta turns the AD&D mechanic on its head. And it makes more sense than the way it was done in AD&D - I like it!

Context: in AD&D, humans could “dual class,” which is similar to what you described - effectively retiring in one class and beginning to advance in another - and non-humans could “multi-class,” where they gained experience in two or more classes at the same time, leveling more slowly but getting the benefits of both classes.

It’s a bit unclear what you mean by “Apple” - I’m assuming you mean Safari on both Mac and iOS.

The search engine I use is SearxNg. On Firefox on Mac it was pretty easy to add.

To use it in Safari, I installed the Keyword Search extension from the App Store. It has the option to set a search engine as the default if you don’t use a keyword, so I did that. This works in both Mac and on iOS / iPadOS.

There are other Safari extensions that do similar things, like Customize Search Engine (free). Kagi has an extension that can make Kagi the default search engine, for example (it doesn’t appear that there’s an equivalent for Startpage, though). I haven’t used anything other than Keyword Search for this, though.

Eligible libraries, archives, and museums have a few exemptions to the DMCA’s anti-circumvention clauses that aren’t available to ordinary citizens, but these aren’t unique to the Internet Archive. For example:

Literary works, excluding computer programs and compilations that were compiled specifically for text and data mining purposes, distributed electronically where:

(A) The circumvention is undertaken by a researcher affiliated with a nonprofit institution of higher education, or by a student or information technology staff member of the institution at the direction of such researcher, solely to deploy text and data mining techniques on a corpus of literary works for the purpose of scholarly research and teaching;

(B) The copy of each literary work is lawfully acquired and owned by the institution, or licensed to the institution without a time limitation on access;

(C) The person undertaking the circumvention views the contents of the literary works in the corpus solely for the purpose of verification of the research findings; and

(D) The institution uses effective security measures to prevent further dissemination or downloading of literary works in the corpus, and to limit access to only the persons identified in paragraph (b)(5)(i)(A) of this section or to researchers or to researchers affiliated with other institutions of higher education solely for purposes of collaboration or replication of the research.

This exemption doesn’t allow them to publish the content, though, nor would it provide them immunity to takedown requests, if it did.

These exemptions change every three years and previously granted exemptions have to be renewed. The next cycle begins in October and they started accepting comments on renewals + proposals for expanded or new exemptions in April, so that’s why we’re hearing about companies lobbying against them now.

Dunno, I think regardless of the method used by the extension, I think any extension called "Bypass Paywalls" that does what it says on the tin can pretty unambiguously be said to be designed to circumvent "technological protection measures".

“Bypass” and “Circumvent” are nearly synonymous in some uses - they both mean “avoid” - but that’s not really the point.

From a legal perspective, it’s pretty clear no circumvention of technological protection measures is taking place. Yes, bypassing or circumventing a paywall to get to the content on the site itself would be illegal, were that content effectively protected by a technological measure. But they’re not doing that. Rather, a circumvention of the entire site is occurring, which is completely legal (an obvious exception would be if they were hosting infringing content themselves or something along those lines, but we’re talking about the Internet Archive here).

- to be clear, I’m referring to what was detailed in the request, not the part that was redacted. That part may qualify as a circumvention.

In this case, it circumvents the need to login entirely and obviously it circumvents the paywall.

Following the same logic, Steam could claim that a browser extension showing where you can get the same game for cheaper or free circumvents their technological protection measure. It doesn’t. It circumvents the entire storefront, which is not illegal.

That’s the same thing that’s happening here - linking to the same work that’s legally hosted elsewhere.

Though as you said, these guys should probably be sending DMCAs to the Internet Archive

Yes - if they don’t want their content available, that’s what they should do. They might not want to do that, because they appreciate the Internet Archive’s mission (I wonder if it’s possible to ask that content be taken down until X date, or for content to be made inaccessible but for it to still be archived?) or they might be taking a multi pronged approach.

Maybe archive.today is the problem? Maybe they don't honor DMCA requests.

Good point. If so, and if their site isn’t legally compliant in the same ways, then the extension becomes a lot less legally defensible if it’s linking there. That’s still not because it’s circumventing a technological protection, though - it’s because of precedent that “One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, going beyond mere distribution with knowledge of third-party action, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses,” (Source), where “device” includes software. Following that precedent, plaintiffs could claim that the extension promoted its use to infringe copyright based off the extension’s name and that it had knowledge of third-party action because it linked directly to sites known to infringe copyright.

The Digital Media Law Project points out that there are two ways sharing links can violate the DMCA:

• Trafficking in anti-circumvention tools - which is obviously not what’s going on here
• Contributory copyright infringement - which is basically doing something described by the precedent I shared above.

I’m not sure how the extension searches web archives. It if uses Google, for example, then it would make sense to serve Google ae DMCA takedown notice (“stop serving results to the known infringing archive.piracy domain”), but if the extension directly searches the infringing web archive, then the extension developers would need to know that the archive is infringing. Serving them a DMCA takedown (“stop searching the known infringing archive.piracy domain”) would give them notice, and if they ignored it, it would then be appropriate to send the takedown directly to their host (Github, the browser extension stores, etc) citing that they had been informed of the infringement of a site they linked to and were de facto committing contributory infringement themselves.

Given that they didn’t do that, I can conclude one of the following:

1. The lawyers are incompetent.
2. The lawyers are competent and recognize that engaging in bad faith like this produces faster results; if this is contested they’ll follow up with something else, possibly even the very actions I described.
3. The archives that are searched by the extension aren’t infringing and this was the best option the lawyers could come up with.

How is the accused project designed to circumvent your technological protection measures?

The identified Bypass Paywalls technology circumvents NM/A’s members’ paywalls in one of two ways. private]

For hard paywalls, it is our understanding that the identified Bypass Paywalls technology automatically scans web archives for a crawled version of the protected content and displays that content.

If the web archives have the content, then a user could just search them manually. The extension isn’t logging users in and bypassing your login process; it’s just running a web search for them.

The purpose of slang is to signal group identity.

That’s a purpose of slang, not its only purpose.

Slang can also be more efficient (“cringe” is one syllable; “cringe-worthy” is three) and it contributes to the evolution of language, leading some terms - like “cringe” to become more mainstream and to see use outside of the group that popularized them.

Besides, Gen Z might have come up with “cringe,” but millennials were practicing nounification, verbification, and adjectification when Gen Z was still learning to talk, and that’s all “cringe” as an adjective is.

to my ear, calling something "cringe" sounds like something kids say, because mostly in my everyday life, I only hear children saying it like it made up a fair chunk of their entire vocabulary.

The oldest Gen Z-ers are 27 and the youngest are 12, so almost none of them are “kids” anymore - they’re teens and adults. But there’s also a difference between using slang on the internet and in in-person contexts, particularly more formal ones. Slang that’s common in one group might not be in another group in the same age range, even if they’re geographically similar. But even so, I’ve heard millennials use (and over-use) “cringe” in public and in private.

When a GenXer or old Millennial use it, it can come across as either affected or immature.

A 6 year old in 1994 would have been born in 1988, which is right in the middle of the millennial range (1981-1996), meaning they wouldn’t be an “old Millennial.” But even if they were born in ‘81, my opinion wouldn’t change. Focusing too much on who “should” use a term like “cringe,” especially online, isn’t at all productive, and isn’t very different from telling someone they’re not a big enough fan to wear a t-shirt or to cosplay as a character they think is cool. They’re both just gatekeeping, plain and simple.

The original movie came out in 1994, meaning that if you were a kid when it came out, you’re a millennial. ”Cringe” is early Gen Z slang and it’s a derivative of “cringe-worthy,” so it’s not like anyone is going to be confused about how to use it. What are you, the age police?

Tldr: Okay, Boomer.

I haven’t switched to Windows 11, but I also haven’t been using Windows 10, either. I’ve seen plenty of people say that Windows 11 is fine, but you should probably check with other students at your school who use the same software you do. Make sure your machine can be upgraded to 11, at least, since support for 10 is ending soon and that could result in software or services that you need being unavailable as well.

That’s what the plugin they used did.

They have no recourse

They can do all of the following:

1. Report the seller to the platform for selling stolen goods.
2. Return the stolen goods to the rightful owner, if they’re able to get their information, or if not, to Valve or even just the police department.
3. File a suit in small claims court against the seller for damages (the amount they paid + any other expenses they’ve incurred, like the cost to mail it to the rightful owner, including legal fees) or, if the platform won’t provide the seller’s information, against the platform itself.

while (true) { print money; }

Someone’s never heard of Bitcoin

It sounds like your bank is doing MFA (multi-factor authentication) correctly, and that’s a good thing, because it sure would be obnoxious to have to verify all that information just to view your balances, and it’s a higher risk activity to allow someone to transfer funds than to view your balances.

If the dealership didn’t verify your identity and someone else made changes to your lease, would you have a problem with that?

You don’t have to use an authenticator on your phone. You can use a password manager like Bitwarden (their $10/year premium plan, or their $40/year family plan) that supports saving TOTP and auto-filling them from a browser extension (click to copy or you can have it automatically copied to the clipboard after you auto-fill the password). It also supports passkeys and you can avoid getting locked into a single ecosystem that way.

If someone could take your anti-AI argument, change almost nothing and make it an anti-digital art argument, it’s probably not a good argument.

• "All forms of media take inspiration from one another, so that means it's fine to digitally reproduce a traditional artist’s style using my digital tools."
• "Traditional Artists are necessarily really privileged to be able to afford their supplies - canvas, paint, brushes, are expensive! - so it's morally OK to draw digitally, since that’s lower cost and doesn’t hurt anyone."
• "Using digital art instead of scanning in traditionally painted tiles for game sprites will help me finish my game faster!"
• "I suck at oil painting, so I have to resort to using a stylus and can undo all of my mistakes and can even apply filters to the whole image and undo it if I don’t like it!"
• "People saying that my digital art isn’t are tyrannical! I deserve to have my digital art be seen as equal to hand-drawn ones!"

I’ve seen every one of those arguments made by digital artists.

Logical fallacies demonstrated in your post include:

• Straw Man: You’ve taken pro-AI arguments, intentionally applied them to a different and much less defensible concept, and are suggesting that refuting those misapplied arguments equates to defeating the original pro-AI arguments.
• False equivalence: you’re equating AI art to copyright infringement, with your argument that they’re the same being because the same arguments can be made defending them. If that were valid, by the same argument we’d have to conclude that AI art is the same as digital art, too.
• Hasty generalization / Ad hominem: You’re grouping all AI art supporters when describing the logical arguments they use to defend it / you’re referring to people who defend AI art as “Boosters”
• Special Pleading: Unless you would argue that digital art isn’t art, you’re making an exception for it without backing up why it’s any different.
• Appeal to Ridicule: Particularly in the last sentence, but your whole comment has this vibe.

You’re also misusing the Motte and Bailey fallacy. Even ignoring that they’re supposed to be two different things that are being conflated (the Motte, which is easily defensible, and the Bailey, which is less defensible and is what you’re really advancing), you’re suggesting that the two arguments are contradictory by presenting them devoid of any nuance whatsoever. You’re also ignoring that the people hyping up AI to businesses and shareholders and the people defending themselves as AI “artists” are different people.

Not trying to tear you down, but there are much better arguments to make the points you’re trying to prove. It’s ironic to see a post about confronting people with flaws in their argument itself that is itself riddled with logical fallacies. I felt compelled to point this out.

Damage taken from being the Fall season would be called "Fall damage" in English though.

If I’m in a fight, I’m fighting. If I’m on a walk, I’m walking. On a hike? Hiking. If I’m at a party, I’m partying. If there’s rain in the air, it’s raining. If I’m applying butter to my toast, I’m buttering my toast. If I’m on a boat, I’m boating. If I’m in the middle of a fall, I’m falling.

Is it hard to understand that someone is referring to the act of entering Fall (or being in the middle of Fall) when they call it “falling?”

Regardless of whether you find that difficult to understand or to accept, it’s a well-established linguistic phenomenon known as “verbification.”

You are not falling. It is fall. Falling is only from a present tense verb of fall.

You’re wrong on several counts.

First, you don’t suffer “falling damage” from falling. You suffer it from landing after falling (refer to page 183 of the PHB if you don’t believe me). However, casting Feather Fall is a reaction that you can take when you or another creature “falls,” so it was appropriate to cast it at the start of the season.

Second, “falling” is not the present tense of “fall.” The simple present tense of “fall” is “fall” or “falls,” but other “present tenses” include: the present perfect simple (“He has fallen”), present progressive/continuous, and present perfect progressive.

“Falling” is the present participle, and it can be used both as an adjective (“The falling bard”) and as part of the past continuous/progress (“The bard was falling”), present continuous/progressive (“The bard is falling”), and future continuous/progressive (“The bard will be falling”) verb tenses, as well as with their perfect variants (had been falling, has been falling, will have been falling).

You say that like it’s not compatible with the ones people already have.

Each credit reporting agency offers this option, at no charge …

It is highly recommended to lock your credit. Frankly, it should be locked by default. In September of 2017, Equifax announced a data breach that exposed the personal information of 147 million people.

Note that, before this incident, it wasn’t consistently free. I remember it being free to lock, but costing $20 or so to unlock. A law passed in 2018 required credit bureaus to offer freezes and unfreezes (and to fulfill them within certain time frames) for free.

Also note that you might need to look for a “freeze” instead of a lock. Experian charges $25/month for their “CreditLock” service, for example, but they offer a free security freeze.

Heads up that this article is from March 2021.

Are you seriously asking why a commonly supported 27 year old format doesn’t need a fallback, but a 2 year old format does?