Alex Schroeder 🐝 @kensanata@octodon.social

https://blog.valerieaurora.org/2018/06/17/in-praise-of-the-30-hour-work-week/

This resonates well with me. (Though, at the moment, I'm working 60 hour weeks, paid for all 60, but looking into cutting that down dramatically.)

Yet another #atreus build, quite happy with the result https://icosahedron.website/media/rCbkAcJ0HWrrQ_o1VNg

i just got a card jacked by a skimmer at a local gas station, and when i dialed the fraud prevention number i got put on hold for 5 minutes and then it was a _robot voice complete with fake throat clearing noises_ and i didn't twig that it was failing the turing test until it berated me to read the full name on my card instead of responding to what i'd said and then condescendingly told me "that's better".

the actual cyberpunk dystopia is so fucking lame.

France's Front National (who support the EU's mandatory copyright filters) furious when Youtube's copyright filters kill their channel https://boingboing.net/2018/06/17/three-days-left.html #frontnational #TVLibertés #article13 #Copyfight #france #petard #Post #eucd #eu

Same reason why I've been playing through skyrim lately. There are just some games that are fun no matter when you pick them up.

3. YouTube Content ID is flawed for Classical Musicians
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141109004524-12070312-youtube-content-id-is-flawed-for-classical-musicians

"Content ID (...) often mismatches commercial classical recordings with original performances of the same classical music which are in the public domain. So when classical musicians post their original performances on YouTube, there will often be advertisements to monetize that video. The uploader is not the one who profits, but rather it's the record label that owns the rights to the commercial recording."

2. YouTube Identifies Birdsong As Copyrighted Music
https://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/26/2141246/youtube-identifies-birdsong-as-copyrighted-music

"I make nature videos for my YouTube channel, generally in remote wilderness away from any possible source of music. And I purposely avoid using a soundtrack in my videos because of all the horror stories I hear about Rumblefish filing claims against public domain music. But when uploading my latest video, YouTube informed me that I was using Rumblefish's copyrighted content"

So, here's a couple of decisions made by algorithms already used by YouTube for a very similar purpose.

You tell me if this makes sense.

1. NASA's Official Mars Landing Video Got Taken Off YouTube Over Bogus Copyright Claims
https://gizmodo.com/5932089/nasas-official-rover-landing-video-got-taken-off-youtube-over-bogus-copyright-claims

"The Curiosity Rover may have landed safely on the surface of Mars, but like all good things, it's not invulnerable to completely bogus takedown requests.

(...)[T]he video was rendered unavailable due to a copyright claim by Scripps Local News."

If you're in the UK, you can opt out of sharing your confidential medical data with researchers at this address:

https://www.nhs.uk/your-nhs-data-matters/

Opting out does NOT affect your own treatment, your doctors will still be able to access your data when they need it.

#NHS #UK #Medical #Healthcare #Privacy #BigData #Research

TIL There are music typewriters and they came in all sorts of shapes, sizes, and mechanisms

http://www.musicprintinghistory.org/music-typewriters

#RetroHardware

So much for Reddit ...

Motherfucking auto-roll video ads.

https://redditblog.com/2018/06/12/native-video-ads-are-here/

"very concerned about potential impacts that the proposal would have on #Wikipedia, which largely addresses infringing content through community mechanisms. Such proposals put too much weight in the power of technologies for automatic content detection—be it artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, or hash-based file identification—w/out considering the impact on human-driven models of content moderation." #article13

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/06/14/dont-force-platforms-to-replace-communities-with-algorithms/

.

This is fascinating: How NASA's early images of the moon were much better than we realised: http://www.worldofindie.co.uk/?p=682