Excepts the internet blackout has nothing to do with censorship at all. This is just Iran protecting itself from cyber attacks, if they had kept Internet running, they would have been completely pwned.
Come now, let's not be naïve. If protestors or dissenters are organizing over social media, or app-based Internet communications, shutting down the Internet is a great way to keep them in the dark and prevent the majority of them from either keeping up with local demonstrations or exfiltrating recordings of civil unrest.
It is true that shutting off your Internet prevents cyber-attacks, but imagine if it happened in the USA: it would effectively shut down much of our commerce and everyday living activities. In the West, Internet access is becoming more of an essential utility than the icing on the cake, or a recreational forum for malcontents and ne'er-do-wells. Or perhaps it's both at once.
Perhaps you are, instead, disingenuous, because the article you linked says nothing about the effects of an Internet blackout nor its motivations and now you're blathering about orchestration and arming, which likewise have nothing to do with an Internet blackout.
You’re correct, the article doesn’t say anything about that, I’m using my own judgement given the facts that I have.
All I know is, if I was at war with the USA, I would definitely cut the internet in my country. Not doing it is like being at war with a big maritime power, and not protecting your coastline.
I find it interesting that the BBC published this at a time they are already under heavy criticism for their coverage of the war in the Middle East (where they didn’t blink at Trump’s genocidal threats and published an article claiming that Iranians wanted to be nuked).
Now we’re saying that war is just natural. It must be a coincidence.
It's a biomass burning power plant. Biomass is absolutely renewable by any definition of "renewable". More can be grown on useful short term timescales.
Also, burning biomass does not affect the long term CO2 makeup of the atmosphere. The CO2 emitted was sequestered a decade ago, not 400 million years ago. Biomass carbon release is the normal carbon cycle of the earth.
It takes decades to grow the trees that then absorb the CO2 that is emitted from the burning, and the biomass that Drax burns has been (and still is) imported from Canada from felling old-growth forests (some of which have been estimated to be over 250 years old), and this isn't even considering the emissions from transporting the pellets via ship, rail and road from western Canada to eastern England which is not tracked against Drax.
The burning is still part of the short term carbon cycle, and biomass is still renewable.
Boreal forests in particular lose carbon sequestration capacity as they age, and from a carbon perspective cutting them down for lumber is a good thing. Wood pellets are generally from the waste material, not wood that could be used as lumber for houses or whatever.
You can certainly make other arguments in favor of not cutting down old growth forests, and certainly transport using fossil fuels is bad, but "I don't like how they go about it and also they release emissions that I don't care to understand how it fits into the carbon cycle" doesn't mean they "aren't renewable".
The point you could effectively make if you so chose would be "renewable energy sources are not cut and dry always a good thing".
We have no idea what is in that contract with Google. They get to be the default search engine, but what else? Does it prevent Firefox from accepting some sources of funding, like donations?
yes, I do mean Firefox specifically. Mozilla fundation is not Mozilla corporation. The money you give to the fundation is for their charity work, none of that goes to the development of Firefox.
It's the year of the horse in their zodiac. The (translated) prompt is wild:
"""
A desolate grassland stretches into the distance, its ground dry and cracked. Fine dust is kicked up by vigorous activity, forming a faint grayish-brown mist in the low sky. Mid-ground, eye-level composition: A muscular, robust adult brown horse stands proudly, its forelegs heavily pressing between the shoulder blades and spine of a reclining man. Its hind legs are taut, its neck held high, its mane flying against the wind, its nostrils flared, and its eyes sharp and focused, exuding a primal sense of power. The subdued man is a white male, 30-40 years old, his face covered in dust and sweat, his short, messy dark brown hair plastered to his forehead, his thick beard slightly damp; he wears a badly worn, grey-green medieval-style robe, the fabric torn and stained with mud in several places, a thick hemp rope tied around his waist, and scratched ankle-high leather boots; his body is in a push-up position—his palms are pressed hard against the cracked, dry earth, his knuckles white, the veins in his arms bulging, his legs stretched straight back and taut, his toes digging into the ground, his entire torso trembling slightly from the weight. The background is a range of undulating grey-blue mountains, their outlines stark, their peaks hidden beneath a low-hanging, leaden-grey, cloudy sky. The thick clouds diffuse a soft, diffused light, which pours down naturally from the left front at a 45-degree angle, casting clear and voluminous shadows on the horse's belly, the back of the man's hands, and the cracked ground. The overall color scheme is strictly controlled within the earth tones: the horsehair is warm brown, the robe is a gradient of gray-green-brown, the soil is a mixture of ochre, dry yellow earth, and charcoal gray, the dust is light brownish-gray, and the sky is a transition from matte lead gray to cool gray with a faint glow at the bottom of the clouds. The image has a realistic, high-definition photographic quality, with extremely fine textures—you can see the sweat on the horse's neck, the wear and tear on the robe's warp and weft threads, the skin pores and stubble, the edges of the cracked soil, and the dust particles. The atmosphere is tense, primitive, and full of suffocating tension from a struggle of biological forces.
"""
I think they call it "horse riding a human" which could have taken two very different directions, and the direction the model seems to have taken was the least worst of the two.
At first I thought it's a clever prompt because you see which direction the model takes it, and whether it "corrects" it to the more common "human riding a horse" similar to the full wine glass test.
But if you translate the actual prompt the term riding doesn't even appear. The prompt describes the exact thing you see in excruciating detail.
"... A muscular, robust adult brown horse standing proudly, its forelegs heavily pressing between the shoulder blades and spine of a reclining man ... and its eyes sharp and focused, exuding a primal sense of power. The subdued man is a white male, 30-40 years old, his face covered in dust and sweat ... his body is in a push-up position—his palms are pressed hard against the cracked, dry earth, his knuckles white, the veins in his arms bulging, his legs stretched straight back and taut, his toes digging into the ground, his entire torso trembling slightly from the weight ..."
> But if you translate the actual prompt the term riding doesn't even appear. The prompt describes the exact thing you see in excruciating detail.
Yeah, as they go through their workflow earlier in the blog post, that prompt they share there seems to be generated by a different input, then that prompt is passed to the actual model. So the workflow is something like "User prompt input -> Expand input with LLMs -> Send expanded prompt to image model".
So I think "human riding a horse" is the user prompt, which gets expanded to what they share in the post, which is what the model actually uses. This is also how they've presented all their previous image models, by passing user input through a LLM for "expansion" first.
Seems poorly thought out not to make it 100% clear what the actual humanly-written prompt is though, not sure why they wouldn't share that upfront.
In all honesty, it was easy for me to switch to Linux because I was always more interested in the computer itself rather than what useful things I could do with it, so I actually never missed a particular application. I also was more interested in making a game run in Wine with maximum effort rather than actually playing it (I did play countless hours of World of Warcraft though...)
Facebook would start listening on port X and and then their embedded SDK in other websites or app would query that IP and port, get their unique id, and track users much better.
reply