I did something similar but without the gum stage. Since I was buying concentrated nicotine liquid and diluting it with a PG/VG mix, I would just reduce the strength until I was literally putting a single drop of the strong nicotine liquid into my 10ml vial of PG/VG. Then to prevent just vaping more I would count the number of puffs per hour and reduce it until after one puff per hour I'd go to one puff every 2 hours etc.
I drew it out over several months. The thing I was really surprised by was that when I finally stopped, I still felt withdrawal symptoms, which is a testament to how addictive nicotine is, given what a tiny amount I had reached.
I actually tried something similar, but failed. I'm curious, how often did you dilute and by how much?
This was my setup: I mixed up 100ml of e-juice in a graduated bottle at whatever strength I was using at the time, somewhere between 15 and 20 mg/ml, can't remember exactly. From that bottle, I would fill a separate 10ml bottle, which I'd use to refill my tank. After refilling the 10ml bottle, I would top up the big bottle with VG/PG back up to 100ml, so diluting by 10%. I was vaping about half a 5ml tank per day at this point, so the 10ml one lasted about 4 days, and I'd top up the tank every morning. The theory being that the stuff in the tank would also get somewhat diluted every time I topped it up, since it would gradually get more of the stuff from the most recent filling of the 10ml bottle.
But somehow I just ended up unconsciously vaping more and with longer puff until I was at one tank per day, and then more than one tank per day.
Instead of a tank I was also using an open dripper head on the vape, so I could basically limit how many drops of liquid I was putting on the actual coil. And I would basically just look at the clock to see when it was time to add more.
It's only a matter of time until most of these games get vibe-coded back end clones. Still not as good as a full ROM but at least and improvement over complete unplayability.
Yes. My colleague was telling me about how he was vibe coding a port of some random-ass PSP game. So people are clearly already doing it.
PS4 is AMD64 based. And so few games leveraged the cell processor in the PS3 to it's fullest, IIRC, the current emulation strategy is to translate the cell calls to x86. So the hard work is actually already done.
I have no doubt it'll be attempted, but they won't be clones, they'll be clowns.
Even if they were pixel perfect clones with exactly the same play. As a person who vibe codes like there's no tomorrow to have custom software, I still find the color of the bytes important for something like a retrogame.
Otherwise it's like color photocopy of an art piece.
Honestly the advent of coding agents means that a company could just instruct the agent to strip out any code in their backend that they can't release for legal reasons, and dump a non-compiling zip out into the public and have someone in the community fix it up and make it runnable. The costs of doing it are much lower than in the past.
It's worse than that. I have an LG TV which I never connected to Wifi at all. Instead we use the Amazon FireStick which just contains all the same spyware that the LG TV would've had but sends it to Amazon instead.
In fact, due to DRM licensing, it's not possible to have a legit TV streaming device that isn't full of spyware and still allows you to watch streaming services like Netflix, Disney+ etc in full resolution.
Option A: If you have 1 ton metal machines powered by exploding liquid driving at 60 miles per hour around your neighborhood make sure the wheel is properly pointed in the right direction. Designate specific areas where the machine are allowed to move. Train parents to keep their children or impaired away from those areas. Ensure adequate processes are in place from training the drivers of the machines so they know where they are allowed to drive and where not. Take into account evolving environmental regulations. Ensure safety barriers are used in areas where the vehicles are liable to lose control. Place signs around to remind forgetful drivers of the specific rules of driving in a specific area, or issues such as ice and snow that could cause the vehicle to crash. Make sure drivers pay large insurance premiums to ensure they can pay for any damages caused by their vehicle. Give traffic police their own vehicles in order to apprehend anyone not following the rules. Budget for all of this and ensure there is a long term plan for maintaining the car and everything that goes with it.
Given the number of places in the world that have been severely restricting or banning car use to promote walking and other safer and more environmentally friendly alternatives I'm not sure your analogy is making exactly the point you intended.
I honestly think it would be completely legit to build a completely separate ecosystem on top of the same protocol. A separate set of relays, separate apps which connect to those relays by default, no lighting payments, different defaults, marketed to a different audience. Ultimately it is not just a single network. If users need interoperability eventually they can easily add other relays. But it's true that many people are put off by the current community.
Nah, you didn't understand it. Lightning is a layer-2 protocol on top of bitcoin. Nostr is the so-called layer-3. Good luck trying to build Nostr without Lightning.
It’s easy to have Nostr without it. Lightning support was an afterthought and you can just choose not to implement that NIP in the client. On the relay side you could just filter out that event type. Not hard at all.
The amount of ignorance about Nostr (by both pro and antis) is astounding for such a simple concept. I feel like literally nobody reads the very short specs.
False. Nostr is not “Layer 3” in any standard technical sense. Nostr is an open, decentralized protocol for exchanging and publishing messages/events. It doesn't sit on top of Bitcoin or Lightning in the way Lightning sits on Bitcoin. You absolutely can build/use Nostr without Lightning. Stop with this (anti-crypto)-bro fear mongering (yes anti-crypto in brackets as 1 thing). It's not helping FOSS, it's doing big-tech's work.
You're just lying because you hate crypto. That is as bad as the blind evangelizing of cryptocurrencies.
If you have any other proposal for true micropayments (as in fractions of cents of value that flow freely) please, indulge me. I for one would prefer to give value via lightning over forcing my eyeballs on ads everywhere I look.
Same goes for the agents I deploy, I'd like to have methods of returning value for whatever value they extract (in the form of information).
I indeed misunderstood, didn't realize that was you yourself you linked to. Sorry we are on the same boot it seems. Still, you're wrong about Nostr being useless without Lightning. And it is unhelpful to suggest it is.
You stand corrected, and I stand corrected too because I just watched https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tbt3jL1Ms0w (as suggested by other user in another comment) and it finally clicked.
Imo any fair future economy should embrace decentralized 9ie without a company taking a cut Apple style) frictionless sharing of value. Either that or we must have strive for a fair post-scarcity economy (Star Trek like). The way things are going I'm even more skeptical about achieving that.
Have we not learned that there's nothing money can't corrupt? Friction is probably a good idea or the network will be overrun by some kind of micro-scam demanding $0.00001 every millisecond from every user.
You can still send money without integration, but you have to copy-paste an address into a separate bitcoin program and click a few buttons.
The irony is that this is the exact opposite of the "let me google that for you" meme of the previous decade. If you have a question that could've been answered by AI, maybe you should've used AI in the first place.
I have the totally opposite sentiment from the previous LMGTFY meme. It was easier before to ask humans rather than do some research using Google, that's not true anymore with LLMs.
Now if I ask a question to humans I'm looking for their personal opinions drawn from their personal experience, be it ticket size for a feature on a legacy codebase, a design decision or a product strategy decision.
I agree that if someone asks you something, you should at least write "I asked AI and it said..." rather than pretending the AI response was your own. If you ask me something and my first response is to ask AI, it's probably because I only know enough on the subject to ask AI, and don't know much more beyond that, which would be the real answer.
If someone can solve the spam problem in email without just manually whitelisting specific providers that heavily monitor their users, then they can completely reverse the direction of this problem. Unfortunately it doesn't seem likely someone could do that.
That would work if most spam wasn't from the cartel. I receive single digit percentage of "spam" from randoms, 95%+ is from Gmail/Google, o365 or mailgun/whatever. Not one of them can either filter their users or actually action abuse reports.
I enforce strict spec and behaviour compliance, as well as policies (SPF, dkim, etc). Aside from a very small number of well known spam/abuse sources, it's largely from legitimate mail accounts on Gmail/outlook etc. or idiot msps.
I wish that was true for all cases. My uni email is 99.9% spam and everything comes from official accounts sending irrelevant stuff to everyone and their grandma
I tried to self host my email but I immediately ran into the issue that basically every ISP and VPS host available to me block outgoing connections on the SMTP ports. This is a fairly new development in the last few years and is done mainly so that users can't cause their providers to end up on a blacklist.
For some time it was possible to just send a special request to the provider asking them to unblock the port, but this is becoming less common, for often they simply deny the request.
Users who have been hosting their own email for many years have often been grandfathered in so they might not even be aware of this.
I set up SPF, DKIM, DMARC, not on any public blacklists (confirmed through https://multirbl.valli.org/), whitelisted by DNSWL.org at medium trust level, never sent any bulk email, and I had constant deliverability issues with Outlook and Gmail. Both of our experiences might be true, but yours does not invalidate mine. Simply setting up SPF and DKIM is not sufficient to ensure deliverability.
I had both setup previously and constantly ended up in my recipients spam. When I'm trying to sort my life admin with local council/government/landlord/utilities, it's one thing to have a 'cool' custom email, but it's another to say "oh yeah, sorry, it's probably in your spam".
Haven't had an issue since I moved to 365. Costs a little more but so much less hassle. I don't like it but I also need people to actually receive my emails.
I agree Spam is the hardest. Setting up a mailserver is pretty easy today, e.g. with NixOS-simple-mailserver you can do it with a few lines and a few minutes of config in your DNS provider, and maintenance is minimal.
But I self-host email for ~20 years, and I have not managed to get rid of Spam without not also getting false positives.
I first used SpamAssistant, in later years Rspamd, but I feel like they are just not good enough. Also I find Rspamd config pretty incomprehensible.
Hosted email like also does not solve this, e.g. GMail filters way much (e.g. important company correspondence leading to orders almost being lost because they landed in our GMail spam, so I had to turn off the spam filter entirely).
A combination of DNSRBL, SpamAssassin, and using different localparts for each service is working very well for me. Some spam is still getting through, but not enough to feel (heh) spammed, and amazingly I haven’t had any false positives from SpamAssassin in years.
It's not in the current providers' interest to help people avoid the current providers' advertisement or avoid paying the providers to host the customers' email.
You mean filtering? That could get extremely expensive computationally, though. Tools like Rspamd support LLM-based filtering, but traditional Bayesian filtering is vastly cheaper and more computationally efficient. Hm, maybe LLMs can be used as an additional signal for ambiguous messages rather than as the primary filter.
If you are thinking using AI to classify messages, the scale of email spam is so massive that using conventional techniques won't work. It won't make sense energetically speaking IMO.
I think techniques like HashCash by Adam Back should be revisited.
Email can't really change much. The protocol is too old.
It would be better if we came up with new protocols that solve the email messaging problems and then gradually wean ourselves off email rather than trying to "fix" email.
In a sense this is already happening although instead of migrating to open protocols which solve the email problems we're migrating a lot of messaging to walled gardens which solve the problems (e.g. WhatsApp).
I guess that was google wave and yea it was a horrorshow.
I had hoped that something useful would come out of blockchain technology that would allow for a better messaging protocol that was spam resistant, e2e encrypted and decentralized by design but I didnt see anything.
>Email can't really change much. The protocol is too old. It would be better if we came up with new protocols that solve the email messaging problems and then gradually wean ourselves off email rather than trying to "fix" email.
The biggest problem with email spam-wise is that it lacks any sort of user/mailbox authentication. The only useful signal in the meta-data is the origin domain. The protocol assumes the domain owner does some form of access-control and every message coming from the domain is equally trusted. If one has been communicating with alice@foobarizer.com and receives an appendage enlargement ad from bob@foobarizer.com they could be reasonably confident that Bob's account was compromised and communicate that out to Potmaster and Alice to be handled internally.
Of course this assumption is fully invalidated by open-access mail service providers: maintaining communication with xXx_kitty_slayer_xXx@tepidmail.com tells absolutely nothing about sincerity and authenticity of messages from DrJohnSmith@tepidmail.com. Not only there's roughly zero correlation, it could be argued that correlation is slightly negative if one does not expect out-of-the-blue contact attempts. Funnily enough, with the critical mass of non-spam migrating to providers, it becomes sort of positive signal, fueling feedback loop: even if the majority of spam came from gmail, messages from gmail would still be more likely to be non-spam than messages from rncrosoft.com, because most non-spam comes from there too.
On top of that, there's a lot of soft-spam. Companies will happily send out critical contract-related information and unwanted-unasked advertising from the very same domain and even the same address. The big providers are not shying away from selling shielding services to spam agencies.
That "someone" could - in theory - require pgpgpg signatures attached to messages and have origin-based filtering/ranking, but good luck convincing people to set up their gmail/outlook to even generate the signature, let alone publish it reliably/revocably. At the receiver end, your only reasonable bet is filtering/ranking the content. It's probably not a strictly uphill battle, but you definitely need significant amount of volume and tagging before your models become good enough and it stops to the case.
In reality, even if it sounds a bit ironic given above, the best route to fixing this is self hosting, especially in the cases where your messages are needed. The more people try to send mail from their self-hosted instances and insisted that it was the problem of the other end to complain to their service providers if they do not receive the messages, the less hegemony the cartel providers would have. And maybe we could have some sort of client auth for email.
I don't see it the same way. I see it as akin to building a machine which can do the cooking for you. There is a lot of experimentation in terms of how you can construct that machine and how you can set it up, and for some people the payoff is in exactly this process.
That's me. I've just moved the puzzle to figuring out the CC optimal "language" and mode of working with an LLM. At the same time, I haven't lost my love/expertise... Yet.
I explained it yesterday that it's no different than Linq powered by EF Core. You still need to understand the database and how SQL will work, or should. If you don't, you're queries will be slow and inefficient, hazardlessly oftentimes.
LLMs are an impressive abstraction, but they are not magic...yet. or maybe it is, but you still need to figure out the incantations. Not that I like to uptick and witchcraft, so I hate that analogy.
I drew it out over several months. The thing I was really surprised by was that when I finally stopped, I still felt withdrawal symptoms, which is a testament to how addictive nicotine is, given what a tiny amount I had reached.
reply