this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
241 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37723 readers
62 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] loops 134 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
[–] Virkkunen@kbin.social 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Watch out mate, you're going to bring out the deniers

[–] gullible@kbin.social 52 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Look, all I’m saying is that I have yet to see any definitive proof that China really exists. A flag with 5 stars and 2 colors? Who do they expect to fool with that?

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also the borders are so inconsistent. One minute it’s 9 dashes, next they’re claiming it’s 10 dashes. Can’t even keep a story straight.

[–] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

And a giant ass wall all around it? Ppfsht, yeah, right. Just believe in fairy tales if you want to.

[–] reflex@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I saw a picture of China's purported leader but it was just Winnie the Pooh.
You can't fool me with cartoons.

[–] loops 6 points 1 year ago
[–] Narrrz@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I've seen lots of people who say they're from China, but they all look just like Japanese people, can I really just take them at their word?

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nice try, @gullible@kbin.social

[–] swnt@feddit.de 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Wow. I had never seen the full image. thanks!

[–] tetraodon@feddit.it 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] loops 3 points 1 year ago

That moment when you go shopping, but have to stop a column of tanks on the way home.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Did you upload the image? I don't see anything

[–] loops 3 points 1 year ago

I did, can you see the link? The picture was originally from there.

[–] liv 98 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

When will people realise that google has tailored algorithms and we are not all experiencing the same search results?

The first thing you’ll see if you search Google for “tank man” right now will not be the iconic picture of the unidentified Chinese man who stood in protest in front of a column of tanks leaving Tiananmen Square, but an entirely fake, AI-generated selfie of that historical event.

No, this is the first thing the author saw. Probably because they are a journalist writing about AI.

When I google tank man I don't even get the AI image on the first page. The top result is from history.com. If I go to google image search it is the 7th result on the page. The top result is from wikipedia.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How do I get google to stop.showing me reddit pages?

Try adding -reddit in your search query.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] rastilin@kbin.social 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Google's becoming pretty terrible anyway, it only seems to return pages that are selling things. I've switched to Kagi at this point and it seems to work better, it's subscription only, but you know you're the one paying for it and that means that you're the end customer.

[–] xilliah 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] rastilin@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because last time I checked they just used Bing anwyay, while Kagi runs their own indexer.

[–] xilliah 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes but why is that better. For censorship you mean?

[–] rastilin@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's better because Bing may still have selling ads as a priority when building the indexer. If you're not the one paying, you're the product.

[–] xilliah 1 points 1 year ago

That's a good point.

[–] AnalogyAddict 1 points 1 year ago

You do know it's not an either- or situation, right? You can be both.

[–] eltimablo@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It changes the question from "why not use duck" to "what does duck really add to bing"

[–] viq@social.hackerspace.pl 5 points 1 year ago

@eltimablo @throws_lemy @xilliah @rastilin what it removes from bing: tracking, and personalized results. I believe it also adds the bang search, which few if any other places have.

[–] xilliah 1 points 1 year ago

Well they have a sensible business model and can provide another stream of income for Bing from users it otherwise wouldn't reach.

[–] snowbell 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Duck duck go is practically broken. I switched to startpage which worked alright until I got a VPN, then I just started using bing with better results. So it is somehow worse than bing even. Duck ignores my quotes and minuses and such things.

[–] thejevans@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I recently switched to kagi, too. Couldn't be happier.

[–] SoftestVoid 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

New Kagi user here too, been very happy so far. Though it turns out I do a lot of searching and blew through the 300 searches in the $5 plan in like 2 weeks...

[–] Byter@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Make an effort to use bangs and I bet you'll stay under the limit. Edit: bang searches don't count towards the limit

Knowing I wanted a result from a certain site but using the search engine to get there was a (bad) habit I brought over from Google.

!imdb barbie

!w mattel

There's even custom bangs, which is something DDG doesn't give you: !libgen some book

[–] viq@social.hackerspace.pl 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Byter
DDG claims 13.5k existing bangs, and here's a form to add a new one https://duckduckgo.com/newbang
@SoftestVoid

[–] Byter@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But they don't allow bangs for sites that do illegal things like copyright infringement. Libgen was my example.

[–] viq@social.hackerspace.pl 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Byter allowing illegal stuff *and* taking money doesn't bode that well for their longevity.

[–] Byter@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Custom bangs are private to the user. It's not dissimilar to saving a bookmark in your browser, except your bookmarks are hosted by someone else.

It doesn't have to be about legality either. Maybe you like a service that is being protested by DDG for whatever reason.

[–] beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

I just signed up with them, too. They were able to get me a link to the age of a small, nondescript lava flow near my town on the third hit. (5000 years old! A youngster!) All the other search engines gave me unrelated crap.

I have a hard stop set up for when I hit $10, so I'll switch tiers if it comes to that. 😅

I don't necessarily like paying for search, but I couldn't take ad-driven search any longer. Big waste of time getting through the chaff.

[–] Narrrz@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I wonder if the verb Google will stay with us when its origin is lost in history

[–] beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

I'm sure it'll still be in the paper. 😉

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BitOneZero 24 points 1 year ago

we aren't far away from easily-made interactive images / video where people will be able to create realistic selfies / video clips of their own self - in famous situations. Like Forest Gump being inserted into meeting historic President. The appeal is too strong and it will likely create tons of highly upvoted/shared social media images distorting the original.

People tend to treat detecting photoshop images as a game of one-upmanship, not as an importance of preserving a documented concept or situation for others to learn and understand.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe google images needs a toggle for AI generated content. It won't be perfect, but it should filter out a chunk of it just by excluding pages that have it

[–] Toribor@corndog.social 6 points 1 year ago

Accurately detecting an AI generated image may be more computationally expensive than generating it in the first place.

[–] sculd 9 points 1 year ago

Another "success" of CCP technology