Atemu

Well none, it clearly says to call your physicist ;)

No that's the trick: Mozilla corp is for-profit.

Sure but that won't do anything about software issues :p

It's entirely useless. Even more advanced views such as BetterBatteryStats or analysing a bug report only give minimally useful information.

The best you can do is disable shit you don't need and measure what impact that has on power draw (usually measured in %/h).

I just pull important stuff via ADB.

I do that via git-annex' ADB special remote but it's just an abstraction over pulling the files manually.

Whatever I put on Lemmy or elsewhere on the fediverse implicitly grants a revocable license to everyone that allows them to view and replicate the verbatim content, by way of how the fediverse works. You may apply all the rights that e.g. fair use grants you of course but it does not grant you the right to perform derivative works; my content must be unaltered.

When I delete some piece of content, that license is effectively revoked and nobody is allowed to perform the verbatim content any longer. Continuing to do so is a clear copyright violation IMHO but it can be ethically fine in some specific cases (e.g. archival).

Due to the nature of how the fediverse, you can't expect it to take effect immediately but it should at some point take effect and I should be able to manually cause it to immediately come into effect by e.g. contacting an instance admin to ask for a removed post of mine to be removed on their instance aswell.

In order to put something in the public domain, you need to explicitly do that. Publicising is not the same as putting something in the public domain.

This comment I'm writing here is not in the public domain and I don't need to explicitly mention that. It's "all rights reserved" by default in most western jurisdictions. You're not allowed to do anything whatsoever with it other than what is covered by explicit exemptions from copyright such as fair use (e.g. you quote parts of my comment to reply to it).

Encoding my comment into the weights of a statistical model to closer imitate human writing is a derivative work (IMHO) and therefore needs explicit permission from the copyright holder (me) or licensee authorised by said copyright holder to sublicense it in such a way.

Feel free to go back to the post and read the edits. They may help shed some light on this. I also recommend checking Perplexity’s official docs.

You're aware that it's in their best interest to make everyone think their """AI""" can execute advanced cognitive tasks, even if it has no ability to do so whatsoever and it's mostly faked?

Taking what an """AI""" company has to say about their product at face value in this part of the hype cycle is questionable at best.

sites like Reddit whose entire existence is due to user content, deciding they can police and monetize my content. They have no right

Um, not they do in fact have "every right" here. It's shitty of course but you explicitly gave them that right in form of an perpetual, irrevocable, world-wide etc. license to do whatever they like to everything you publish on their site.

They also have every right to "police" your content, especially if it's objectionable. If you post vile shit, trolling or other societal garbage behaviour on the internet, nobody wants to see it.

Modern thorium reactors don't exist on the power grid.

You will likely still hear the cell broadcast. Alerts of this level make every phone give off a piercing sound and even if your phone is dead, you will hear it from your neighbours' because it's loud.

with regard/respect to

Whoever told you text is expensive to draw has no idea what they're talking about.