MudMan

I'm not sure about the digital-only stuff, but the OP is specifically talking about yt-dlp as an alternative to ripping the BRs, and I have to agree that ripping the disks will be easier and yields better results.

Hardware availability is the trickiest part, especially for UHD, but if you have a drive that will deal with the disks you have I certainly wouldn't bother with the stream rip.

But hey, as a fallback, it's good to have the option.

I don't really know what this conversation was meant to be about at this point, and after re-reading the thread in order a few times I think you don't either.

I was ready to be mad at you for making me google it, but it turned out to be the same iusnaturalist bullcrap that was already centuries out of date when I studied that stuff and had memory holed, so... meh.

Fond memories of my college years, though. Feeling young and smart and so, so intellectually superior by pointing and laughing at those guys because back then we all thought things were mostly going to get better looking forward. Good times.

Right, but that's my point, compute is compute is compute. There are tensor acceleration cores in commercially available hardware dating back five years. They capped things above a specific performance threshold, is my understanding, but that just means you need more of the less powerful hardware, so all you've done is make things more expensive/less energy-efficient, but not block any specific application. Not in cheap, portable chips, not in huge industrial data center processors.

So not particularly useful to stop cyberwarfare, not particularly useful to stop military applications. The only use I see is making commercial applications less competitive. Specifically on the training side of things.

None of that makes any sense. "Western chips" all come from Taiwan in the first place. "Western designed chips" are also in laptops and mobile phones, including tons of Chinese devices, and that's assuming you mean to include South Korea as "Western", which is a bit of a stretch. Those are fundamentally interchangeable with military hardware. Nobody is putting 4090s and A100s in ICBMs.

Make it make sense. What specific hardware is this stopping from getting to China and for what application?

I am very confused about this ongoing thing regarding "stifling China's access to AI models". Does the US government think GPUs are magic? All you need to make a ML model is some tensor math and a web crawler, maybe some human processing on the later bits. You're not gonna stop China from making them. You're not gonna stop college kids with gaming rigs making them.

I'm guessing the endgame here is to make it slightly more expensive to do this in China to get American companies to have slightly better versions in the market and prevent a TikTok situation, rather than any legitimate strategic goal. Right? I mean, besides commercial protectionism I don't see how this type of language makes sense.

It's not lip service if I can send messages and other people can receive them.

Again, the status quo is you can't do that. Hell, in the spectrum of being dragged into reasonableness by the EU kicking and screaming, Meta is orders of magnitude below Apple here.

I mean, we can debate the finer points of the implementation once it's live, but for now this is nothing but positive movement. If people got over rejecting cookies they can get over dismissing warnings regarding interoperability, and if they don't, the same regulators have a history of re-spanking unruly malicious compliers.

But what would be the point?

I swear, people have all these weird conspiracy theories around supposed "EEE" tactics, but Whatsapp already dominates the instant messaging space. It's pretty much a monopoly. The simplest solution to continue to dominate basically the entire market is do nothing.

Somebody explain to me how literally having the entire market to themselves in exclusive is somehow worse than any interoperability at all. You can't tank the use rate lower than zero.

Yeah, but you do realize all that you're describing is still more open than "this is a closed app that interops with nobody and also is permanently tied to your phone number", right?

I mean, I don't like the guys and I avoid their services whenever possible, but... man, as an unwilling Whatsapp user the ability to migrate without having to convince all my social circles to do anything but check a checkbox sounds like a huge step forward. I literally surfaced the idea of migrating to the WhatsApp group I thought would be most willing today and got nothing but crickets.

"Unknown" goes from 3 to 6% in the same time period, so I think technically it's the year of the Unknown desktop. Sounds catchier, if you ask me.

I keep a FB account I no longer use because in some professional circles in some countries the expectation is you'll get contact details by sharing that.

And I keep a Whatsapp account because where I am that's the default messaging service for everything and everybody on all phone platforms. Businesses and institutions will reach out to you over it. School will send homework to kids over it, doctors will set appointments over it, nobody will question whether you have it, just look up your phone number on it.

Meta won the social media wars ages ago, it's just that some, especially in the US, didn't notice.

Well, yeah. So much of this conversation has gotten really dumb, with both advocates and detractors misrepresenting the tech and its capabilities and applying it to the wrong uses and applications as a result.

Honestly, early on I did think as a summary service for search queries it'd be more useful than it ended up being. It quickly became obvious that without the search results onscreen you basically have to fact check every piece of info you get, so it's only really useful to find answers you already know but had forgotten or that you need a source for.

But hey, at least I noticed that it kinda isn't before I built it as a key part of Windows. At this point if I was going to build a search app around this tech I'd use it for a short summary to replace Google's little blurb cards and still give you the raw results immediately below. It's only really good at parsing a wonky search prompt into a more accurate query. That's why when I have to use one of these I go to Perplexity instead of raw ChatGPT or Bing or whatever, it's the one that's built the most like that, although you still end up having to argue with it when it insists on being wrong and gets sidetracked by its own mistakes.