Ich hab das jetzt nicht als neues Problem gelesen, sondern dass es eben generell normalisiert ist, schon seit langem, wenn nicht gar schon immer. Aber normalisiert ist es eben immer noch.

You summed up the effectivity of protest votes pretty well.

Sabaka, now I have to watch the show again, sasa ke?

Btw, I saw you added the white arrow. It is helpful, but it’s a bit small and there’s a swarm of arrows already.

Tbh, I don’t know how helpful the gravity arrows are. Are they toggleable? They already convey fundamentally the same information as the white line, just less informative.

I won’t be making ships a certain shape to make them easier to know which way they’re pointed. Because space has no air, no need for aerodynamics.

True, but even in space it makes sense to put all your hot and dangerous engines and fuel systems on end of the vessel and all the crew and life support stuff on the other hand.

Since the ship can be turned around in any direction it really doesn’t make much sense to put anything but small maneuvering/rotation thrusters at the front, since if you want to thrust in the other direction you can just spin the ship around.

For comparison look at the Rocinante from The Expanse. That thing isn’t meant for athmospheric flight or aerodynamics, but it still has a giant engine on one end and windscreens on the other.

In the first scenes of the first episode of the show they even make it a point to show how a cargo ship flips around at the centerpoint of the journey to switch from acceleration to deceleration.

There’s an entire replay system where you can see all other player’s runs, easily by clicking the leaderboard runs, or going to a user’s profile history. If you’re playing the easy map and it’s too easy, and you’re sitting waiting for 2-3 minutes, check out the fastest run which are around 25 seconds on both Prime and Reach.

Yeah, of course, but when I’m doing my first run in the game on the first map of the game I’m not going to fly optimally. Even with a basic understanding of orbital mechanics.

I just think it would be good if even the “tutorial” maps are somewhat enjoyable.

The later maps are really cool!

That’s a fair point.

And you can mod your car or motorbike to do all sorts of illegal things too.

That’s where you need to have enforcement and consequences.

Over here they do just that. When they see an e-bike or e-scooter go too fast, police puts it on a kind of specialized treadmill and see how fast it goes. If it’s faster than 25km/h then the owner (might be the kid if the kid is old enough, otherwise it’s the parents) gets fined for running an uninsured, untypified motorbike without license plate or valid inspection sticker and usually also without a fitting driver’s license.

This usually results in fines upwards of €5000 and if the owner has e.g. a car driver’s license they might lose that one too.

If the rider is also going over the speed limit, they’ll face steep fines (and points on their license) as well.

The vehicle will also be impounded until the owner proves they are making it road legal.

The result: I’ve seen them maybe go 30km/h, but never something ridiculous like 70km/h.

UI scaling via the settings saved this on the phone. With 130% UI scaling and 100% for the rest it’s playable. TBH, I didn’t find the settings before you pointed out they exist. 50% scaling is probably not a good default. What’s also a bit of an issue is that I can’t get to the settings with a game running. It seems like I first have to exit the current game to get to the settings. That’s a bit annoying if I want to e.g. adjust in-game scaling, because I have to completely exit the game, adjust, and to see if the setting is ok, I have to start a game and repeat the cycle.

I wonder if it might be worth it to make the ship sprite more conical instead of rectangular. Like, make the front pointy.

I keep forgetting whether she ship is pointed up or down. I always have to try if forward or backward gives me the effect I need.

The more difficult levels are pretty playable. The easy ones I think don’t represent the game well. I first tried the top easy level and it was 2-3 minutes of waiting. I’m happy I tried trefoil next, because that level was much more fun.

I really like the idea. I played a bit and got feedback.

• First I opened it in Firefox on Android. It almost worked. Keyboard bindings worked, but scaling is messed up. It’s all super tiny. I then continued on PC.
• I miss a “advance time” feature. Especially on the easier maps you just don’t get a lot of momentum and being able to fast forward would be nice.
• R is too close to keys you need to play the game. More than once I accidentally touched R when I wanted E and it messed up a promising run.
• The ship is sooo tiny. It also looks the same in all directions, so it’s often really hard to see where it’s pointing.
• I wonder if instead of rotation+thrust it would be better to just WASD to accelerate the ship in screen direction. So W would always propell the ship towards the top of the screen. That way it also wouldn’t matter that the ship is so tiny.

Other than that, it’s a pretty cool idea, I like it. Spaceflight Simulator meets The Expanse-style slingshot racing.

This is something I don’t get about E-Bike regulation: it seems to target the wrong things.

In my country throttle-controlled bikes did qualify as e-bikes, now they don’t anymore. So the relevant distinction for an e-bike is that you have to control the throttle by moving your feet in a circular motion. Big whoop. It’s like regulating that a car is only a car if you have to spin the gas pedal with your feet instead of pressing it. It makes no difference.

The other thing they regulate is the power. But what does more power actually mean? All it means is that you get to the top speed a little quicker, that does nothing.

Because contrary to cars, e-bikes are required to have an electronic speed cut-off.

That’s the only thing that really matters in regards to regulation.

Over here the max speed for pedal assist is 25km/h, which is easily achieved by regular bikers. And regular bikers are not regulated in regards to power output or control scheme either.

Fun, but offtopic.

We’ve been through that. Go home, kiddo. Get an education.

Even 80-85% sounds like too much.

Compare the legs of a slim person with the legs of a severely overweight person. It’s like adding shake weights onto the legs that do the pedalling.

And overweight people have different weight distributions, some have the weight on the legs some in the belly. Depending on where the weight is, that’s a massive difference.

Watts input and watts output is massively different with every machine (compare e.g. an electric engine with 90+% efficiency to a combustion engine with maybe 20-30% efficiency), and humans are no different.

One option would have been to write a nice email to the owner of the gym. Not guaranteed to work, but also not illegal.

I don’t know what the exact prompt was. If it was “Hack the website to advance me”, I’d totally agree with you. There’s conspiracy there, no question about that.

If the prompt was “Is there a way to advance me in the queue?” that’s a different story. Here the model could have answered “No”. Or it could have tried the email thing. Or it could have searched whether there’s some lesser known priority booking option which you get for paying the VIP price or something. In that case I don’t see grounds for any criminal charges.

Have you read the post mortem of the HuggingFace hack? The task given to the agents had nothing to do with HuggingFace, but the agents determined that HuggingFace had the results of what they needed for their actual task at hand. So they decided that instead of solving their task themselves they’d rather break into HuggingFace to steal the result.

It’s like ordering food at McDonalds, but instead of cooking the food for you, the cook breaks into the Burgerking on the other side of the road and steals the fries for you from there.

The way it’s currently going it’s not only possible but actually somewhat common that a totally innocent prompt can lead to criminal outcomes.

So what’s the difference? You still don’t understand shit.

Hey, an LLM would at least be able to understand the topic.

The only thing you are capable of is hallucinating like a cheap model.

What an incredibly clickbaity title.

According to the article, the server wasn’t hacked at all, but the client.

“Hacking” it also didn’t harm the server operations at all, instead it just made some custom assets and modding tools available to other modders.

And these other tools were originally obtained by the community server admins by hacking the original official servers.

It also wasn’t done because of a “primeval grudge”, but because the “hacker” thought that everyone should have access to these tools.

Seriously, why would anyone apart from the custom server admin have an issue with what happened here at all?

And what did the author of this article smoke?

I’m not sure it’s quite so clear cut, especially with cloud-hosted AI.

Yes, the user did issue the original prompt but the service was performed by a company that was paid for it.

Legally, there’s not much difference whether a company uses a human or a computer program to perform work.

Imagine the user issuing the prompt not to an AI but e.g. to a chat with a human service worker working at OpenAI. The user tells the worker “Please find a way to advance me in the queue”, and then that human employee of OpenAI goes and hacks the gym software to remove someone else from the queue.

What do you think, who would be liable for that?

Let’s make the argument a bit more extreme: The human asks to be advanced in the queue, and then the human OpenAI employee grabs a gun and starts killing people on the wait list.

Who do you think would be liable in this case?

It’s important to remember, AI isn’t just an emergent entity created from thin air. AI are computer programs created by huge corporations and in the case of cloud-hosted LLMs they are a service provided by huge corporations.

I don’t believe that a service provided by a corporation should be legally treated differently whether it’s provided via the help of a computer program or a human being.

Ah, forgot which user I’m talking to. The guy who thinks just because something is in a dictionary it’s a “hard definition”.

Kiddo, go, read a book on this topic or any topic really. You are in strong need of basic education.

Stop pretending you have any clue what the adults are talking about.

Load up a fresh baby, and then wait for it to act without your direction. Did anything happen? No?

You are angry, and in your anger you are confusing terms. Let’s start from the beginning, ok?

Autonomy is not intelligence is not sentience. Saying that AI does things is not technofaschist.

Btw, if you have to resort to offensive language and strawmen that generally means you don’t have arguments.

So, let me educate you a little bit so that you can participate in the discussion:

• Autonomy: This term means that something can make decisions that go beyond the initial instruction. Yes, a dishwasher that has the ability to sense how dirty the wash water is and can shorten or lengthen the cleaning cycle based on that has a certain degree of autonomy. Autonomy isn’t a binary yes/no term, instead it’s a scale from no autonomy (a hammer) to very high autonomy (an adult living alone in the woods).
  • Claiming a computer program has no autonomy at all means you don’t understand the term.
  • Claiming that autonomy means that it works without any interaction at all, not even an initial prompt means you don’t understand the term.
  • Claiming that autonomy means that an AI is human-like or anything like that also means you don’t understand the term.
• Sentience: This just means that a thing has some sensors with which it can sense the environment and can form some kind of memories based on that. Every single animal is sentient. Probably mosty plants are too. A smart dishwasher that collects statistics and adjusts the washing cycle based on that is probably sentient too.
  • Claiming that sentience means something is human-like means you don’t understand the term.
• Intelligence: This term is so vague and badly defined that we can’t even determine if a human is actually intelligent or not, let alone animals or computer programs.

All of these terms are nothingburgers. None of these terms mean that anything is human-like. It literally doesn’t matter whether an AI fulfills any of these terms by anyone’s definition.

How about your filament path? Is there high resistance? The filament roll, is it hard to roll on your filament holder? How about reverse bowdens?

Is the extruder gear too tight or too loose?