That’s not as effective, since it can’t block anything that’s hosted from a hostname that also serves regular content without also blocking the regular content. It also can’t trick websites into thinking that nothing is blocked and it can’t apply cosmetic rules. I use it for my devices, but in browsers I supplement it with uBlock Origin (or whatever is available in that browser).
Sure, but I’m just playing around with small quantized models on my laptop with integrated graphics and the RAM was insanely cheap. It just interests me what LLMs are capable of that can be run on such hardware. For example, llama 3.2 3B only needs about 3.5 GB of RAM, runs at about 10 tokens per second and while it’s in no way comparable to the LLMs that I use for my day to day tasks, it doesn’t seem to be that bad. Llama 3.1 8B runs at about half that speed, which is a bit slow, but still bearable. Anything bigger than that is too slow to be useful, but still interesting to try for comparison.
I’ve got an old desktop with a pretty decent GPU in it with 24 GB of VRAM, but it’s collecting dust. It’s noisy and power hungry (older generation dual socket Intel Xeon) and still incapable of running large LLMs without additional GPUs. Even if it were capable, I wouldn’t want it to be turned on all the time due to the noise and heat in my home office, so I’ve not even tried running anything on it yet.
The only time I can remember 16 GB not being sufficient for me is when I tried to run an LLM that required a tad more than 11 GB and I had just under 11 GB of memory available due to the other applications that were running.
I guess my usage is relatively lightweight. A browser with a maximum of about 100 open tabs, a terminal, a couple of other applications (some of them electron based) and sometimes a VM that I allocate maybe 4 GB to or something. And the occasional Age of Empires II DE, which even runs fine on my other laptop from 2016 with 16 GB of RAM in it. I still ordered 32 GB so I can play around with local LLMs a bit more.
I’m not going to defend Apple’s profit maximization strategy here, but I disagree. Most people won’t end up buying a cable and adaptare because they already have one, and in contrast to those pieces made of plastic and metal, the packaging is mostly made of paper. I’m pretty confident that the reduction in plastic and metal makes up for the extra packaging that’s produced for the minority that does buy a cable and/or adapter.
Telegram’s “privacy” is fully based on people trusting them not to share their data - to which Telegram has full access - with anyone. Well, apart from the optional E2EE “secret chat” option with non-standard encryption methods that can only be used for one on one conversations. If it were an actual privacy app, like Signal, they could’ve cooperated with authorities without giving away chat contents and nobody would’ve been arrested. I’m a Telegram user myself and I from a usability standpoint I really like it, but let’s be realistic here: for data safety I would pick another option.
“Uncensored”: https://x.com/KarlMaxxer/status/1823753493783699901. I don’t know if this is really true, but if it is, it’s something that they should’ve called out in their article.
It’s off by default, but activated when you end your search query with a question mark. That option can be turned off.