apt generally downloads more things than apt-get on my Debian machine. apt-get never broke anything, but I tend to eye it suspiciously now.

Yeah alright. That’s one way of looking at it 🙂

I guess what I meant is that I don’t like upgrades that happen without me explicitly requesting each and every one of them, and me watching the upgrade process as it happens for errors.

No Linux system of mine upgrades itself without my explicit consent. That’s one of the many reasons why I don’t run Windows.

The poster would be more convincing if you hadn’t inverted apt-get update and apt-get upgrade…

The cynic in me immediately thinks it’s a honeypot to trap privacy-conscious individuals.

I’ll look it up. But I suspect it’ll be just another case of a company pinky-swearing to respect your privacy, like Apple.

Really? Last I tried it - not very long ago - it refused to do anything without an account.

It does but the UI is terrible for TV. It’s totally unusable without an external keyboard and mouse.

SmartTube doesn’t do local subscriptions, and that’s a big no-no for me.

I wasn’t aware there was a x64 Grayjay desktop app. I’ll check it out. thanks!

Not for Epstein or Trump it ain’t.

I believe him. He has a direct line to the Antichrist.

That’s exactly my point: you can never tell when you’re going to be put under surveillance. And people generally aren’t comfortable around someone wearing one of those invasive recording devices - even if they’re only potentially invasive.

That’s why Google gave up on their own smartglasses project.

No they’re probably right: it’s probably not on all the time, simply because the battery usage would be too high. What I mean was that it’s a rogue camera you can’t escape if the operator of the camera, or more likely Facebook, decides to turn it on for some purpose or other. I didn’t express myself properly.

And it’s gonna get a lot worse when you’re in a room with dozens of people sporting those hateful surveillance things.

It may not be on all the time, but the minute the wearer says, for example, “Hey Siri [or whateever Fuckerberg’s version of Siri is], please translate that menu in English”, then the damn thing starts recording - and possible flash a red light, if you say it does that - and you’re in the frame, you’ve already lost. Facebook has your mug on camera, whether you wanted it or not.

That’s my problem with these things: the whole idea of even using them implies that everybody around the wearer relinquishes their right to privacy by default, something I for one am totally not okay with.

If the wearer wants to submit to Facebook’s surveillance, it’s their problem. But those of us who care about not interacting with Facebook in any way, shape or form are dragged into the wearer’s choices and don’t have any say about it.

The problem with those AI glasses isn’t the AI part of it, but the always-on cameras with that terrible, terrible company Facebook always watching.

Whoever wears those things in public will have the same problem those who tried wearing Google’s smartglasses experienced a few years back: people who recognize they’re being filmed against their will will get angry, demand that the gormless geek doff the cameras, then punches will be thrown if the geek doesn’t comply.

Smartglasses - particularly those powered by privacy-invading monopolies - are socially out of place. They’re not really desired or welcome anywhere. Even Google recognized this and pulled the plug on their smartglasses project, and Facebook will too if they have any common sense.

The rich aren’t facing the law

The point I’m trying to make, as a regular Joe who isn’t mega-rich on the backs of everybody else, is that we’re better than that.

I’m only applying to Musk or Trump the standards I would like others to apply to me. If I was wrongly accused of being a pedo, however vile an individual I might otherwise be, I would like others to have the intellectual honesty to say they have no proof, even if they hate my guts.

Also, it reflects poorly on people who accuse others of things without proof. It certainly would feel good to go around saying Musk is a pedo because the man is so abhorrent. But it would also be wrong.

Until proof that he is a pedo comes out, that is. And boy do I wish proof comes out or what!

I honestly don’t think all people in the Epstein file are pedophiles, even if they went to his island, even if they went multiple times, anymore than all the people in Charlie Manson’s diary were loonies and serial killers. It does cast doubts on what they did or did not know, but it’s not proof of wrongdoing in and of itself.

What being mentioned in the Epstein file really means is that those are utterly disgusting people who are part of a disgusting elite. The friends they keep says a lot about them, and what that says isn’t good.

I do believe Trump is a pedophile however, even if he was only mentioned twice in the Epstein files - in the birthday card and in Epstein’s rolodex - because both clearly show that Epstein and he had something a lot more special, dark and unavowable in common that just partying together.

So no, absent more proof, I’ll assume Musk is “only” an obscenely wealthy, dangerous neo-Nazi with a ketamine addiction and a pedo daddy, but not a pedo himself. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the proof came out soon…

Who’s surprised by this?

If you use AI to do things for you that you could do yourself, fundamentally you cheat.

I’m not talking about a doctor asking AI to interpret some difficult medical data. In that case, AI is a tool.

But when you ask it to write a summary of the boring-ass meeting you just slept through, or code a piece of code you can’t be assed to understand properly yourself, or do your homework, you shortcut your responsibilities.

And at the core of the request lies a profound desire from the requestor to get a result without efforts, which is kind of morally bankrupt to begin with.

“I can’t come to work today, I’m down with women.”

Dude… You could have left out “to work” for a glorious triple-entendre 🙂