testaccount372920

You mean wear something generic, unidentifiable and add some body armor?

Yep, that’s the direction I was thinking. The whole point of these cameras is to track people, including you, meaning that they can track everyone in the area before and after a camera is destroyed. It seems to me that the logical time to destroy a camera is when few other people are arround to stop/witness someone destroying a camera, but that also means there are few people to track and therefore it’s easier to single out whoever did it.

How would you take such a camera down without being spotted and tracked? Do they not look in all directions?

Not asking for all the technical details on how to take one down, just curious how so many can be taken down with so few arrests after. I guess it’s a matter of good disguises?

Apparently the threats are still sufficiently strong that the author dares not mention the company’s name :/

Ah yes, ‘best technologies in the world’ like the software giving Google and the USA full access to all our data?

From my understanding, most LLMs work by repeatedly putting the processing output back into the input until the result is good enough. This means that in many ways the input and the output are the same thing from the perspective of the LLM and therefore inseparable.

The title of this article just doesn’t match reality. It really only (maybe) applies to very high end systems that are already pushing the limits of all components. Most people don’t have the money to waste on that and have plenty of room to upgrade their hardware for a looong time.

If you don’t need much (e.g. no gaming, 3D rendering, etc.), especially if you don’t need a dedicated gpu, then you can upgrade for at least a decade before running into issues. To be fair, a laptop should last a decade as well in that case, but at a higher prices and while being less repairable.

The previous comment gives a pretty clear argument for why desktops are more future proof, I think. Being more repairable is a pretty big deal for the longevity of the whole system.

Although I agree with the sickening greed part, I don’t think it makes sense to make educational use free without have another system in place that pays for the writing of educational books. There’s plenty of content that imo should be free for educational use, but educational books only have an income from educational use, it’s their whole target audience. No income, no book :/