I think they don’t take inspiration from Photoshop. Either it’s been a clone of a different product at some time or they developed it themselves. Hence the differences. I mean the whole UI doen’t really resemble similarity to Photoshop.

I’ve used laptops for more than a decade. And sure, in the early times thermal management wasn’t that elborate. But I really haven’t seen any laptop in many, many years that doesn’t do it with perfect accuracy. And usually it’s done in hardware so there isn’t really any way for it to fail. And I played games and compiled software for hours with all CPU cores at 100% and fans blasting. At least with my current laptop and the two Thinkpads before. The first one had really good fans and never went to the limit. The others hit it with an accuracy of like 2 or 3 degrees. No software necessary. I’m pretty sure with the technology of the last 10 years, throttling doesn’t ever fail unless you deliberately mess with it.

But now that I’m thinking of the fans… Maybe if the fan is clogged or has mechanically failed, there is a way… A decent Intel or AMD CPU will still throttle. But without a fan and airflow inside the laptop, other components might get too hot. But I’m thinking more of some capacitors or the harddisk which can’t defend itself. The iGPU should be part of the thermal budget of the rest of the processor. Maybe it’s handled differently because it doesn’t draw that much power and doesn’t really contribute to overheating it. I’m not sure.

Maybe it’s more a hardware failure, a defective sensor, dust, a loose heat conductor, thermal paste or the fan? I still can’t believe a laptop would enter that mode unless something was wrong with the hardware. But I might be wrong.

Why does it force the processor over the limit in the first place?

I think in every other laptop the CPU just throttles when it gets too hot. Meaning it can never exceed the maximum temperature. I wonder if this is a misunderstanding or if HP actually did away with all of that and designed a laptop that will cook itself.

And it’s not even a good design decision to shutdown the PC if someone runs a game… Aren’t computers meant to run them? Why not automatically lower the framerate by throttling? Why shut down instead?

Quite some AI questions coming up in selfhosted in the last few days…

Here’s some more communities I’m subscribed to:

• !localllama@sh.itjust.works
• !fosai@lemmy.world
• !stable_diffusion@lemmy.dbzer0.com

And a few inactive ones on lemmy.intai.tech

I’m using koboldcpp and ollama. KoboldCpp is really awesome. In terms of hardware it’s an old PC with lots of RAM but no graphics card, so it’s quite slow for me. I occasionally rent a cloud GPU instance on runpod.io Not doing anything fancy, mainly role play, recreational stuff and I occasionally ask it to give me creative ideas for something, translate something or re-word or draft an unimportant text / email.

Have tried coding, summarizing and other stuff, but the performance of current AI isn’t enough for my everyday tasks.

Thanks for broadening my perspective.

Everyone hates that.

And the open source part is just a captcha page and a few config files for haproxy/nginx?

Sounds more like a floppy disk drive to me.

Sure, I mean the needs and wants of the consumer and the companies can be opposed to each other. It’d be convenient for the companies if it were simple®. Maybe at the cost of the people.

I’m not that gifted with the lawmaking process in the USA. I don’t really understand what is the responsibility of whom, national or federal… It sounds to me more like an issue with complexity of having a federal republic than anything with privacy…

And I mean you already have different legislation in all of the states that affect businesses and what they can sell to whom. (And how.)

It depends on how “far from perfect” the bill is. I think most of the times it is wise to revise a bill before it gets passed because it becomes more complicated after that. You’d need a whole new bill for that, start at zero with that, and convince everyone that it’s necessary to tackle the same issue yet again. Of course the role of the EFF also is to advocate for privacy and the people and pick on things if politicians don’t do it right, not agree with a healf-hearted attempt. So they’re bound to be negative about smaller issues with any proposed solution.

I see some valid concerns. There are several loopholes. Some things won’t get protected. I think it’s a bit strange that contractors can do whatever they want. And “pay-for-privacy” isn’t what we should strive for. Sure, it aligns well with American ideology, but it only helps the rich and people with time at hand to care about such things, while exploiting the average Joe and 98% of the population.

And immediately introducing a mandatory ceiling is more caring for the big tech companies, than for the citizen.

(Edit: Concerning the “pay-for-privacy”: https://lemmy.world/post/14442251 )

I don’t think that’s what the graph shows at all. It shows what the average person spends on healthcare each year versus what they get out of it (life expectancy.)

It does so for several countries and shows how things changed over the last half a century. The steeper a line of a country is, the more the healthcare system and medicine has improved. The flatter a line is, the more money you’re pumping into the system for less benefit. And medicine should improve. We’ve made quite some progress since the 1970s and found cures to ilnesses that were a death sentence back then.

That people need more treatment if they’re old is a true fact. But it’s not really depicted in this graph. Sure it’s somewhere in the numbers but you’d need a different diagram for that. Keep in mind that also in the 1970s people grew older and there were old people around… People had grandmas back then. And also people nowadays are healthier for a longer period of time and also retire later. These things work against what demographics makes worse. But it also doesn’t cancel out each other. You’d need a more comprehensive study and more number to tell, not just speculation which is most certainly wrong.

But the mere fact that the line for the USA is such an outliar shows that there is something severely wrong with that healthcare system. And you can see when it started and that it steadily continues this way. Either you’re a different species and medicine works differently for US citizens than for Europeans, or you have severely unique circumstances in the country, or you’re just getting ripped off and some people get rich with the billions that don’t contribute towards health.

And that you someday retire and become a burden on the system is how it’s supposed to be. That’s why you paid all the money during the decades you worked, despite not being sick (yet.)

And there are some more pecularities in the graph. For example you can see that life expectancy is actually decreasing(!) in the last years. That could depict the drugs (Fentanyl deaths) and the rise of suicide in the last years. I’m not sure but these could be possible explanations. Also im Germany where I live mortality rises. Especially during the Covid years and somehow it affects people from the eastern parts of Germany more than people from the western part of the country. That’s all not in this graph however and the reasons are complex. I’m not sure what the cause is for the decline shortly before 2018. People speculate it’s influenza waves and things like that.

That was the graph that opened my eyes a bit back in another discussion. I knew that people were dying in the States because they can’t afford insulin/medication/treatment. But I somehow thought they were at least paying less for healthcare and just poor and society didn’t care about people in need. But it’s way worse. They are dying 2 years earlier WHILE paying twice as much for healthcare. And ruined financially if anything happens to them or their loved ones.

And all of that is a scheme to rip off everyone. Sadly a quite successful scheme for decades already. I mean I’m really amazed by the extent. And I wonder if it were possible to adopt another style, give healthcare to everyone plus every citizen an additional $5.000 for free each year. I don’t really see that happening though. Every government in the past decades, no matter their color, has contributed to keep that graph going in this direction.

Edit: And I’d like to see that diagram for a few other countries. Not just against Europe, Japan, Australia, Israel and Korea.

Hmmh. I recently learned about that. Seems to be roughly 1980 (Reagan era?) when things started going really sideways and nowadays it’s just bad beyond words…

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_United_States

It is unique to the way healthcare works in the USA. I don’t know why, the complete system looks broken. I can only tell you we pay less for healthcare here in Europe and we don’t have to call unless it’s really complicated and a rare situation. I’m sorry if that sound a bit off and doesn’t help…

It it good practice to include a hint into the title/description if a picture is AI generated.

(Also you might want to come to one of the dedicated AI images or fails communities. )

I think you’re right. Having a semi go past you at 50mph is mental.

I think at some point I need a detailed lecture on how cycling feels in the USA or go and see for myself. It’s really difficult for me to judge all of this. Only thing I can say is the sidewalk is a very, very dangerous alternative. But it might very well be the case that you don’t have a good alternative.

We usually avoid sharing roads where cars drive at 50mph. Most of the time it’s 30mph where you’d get in such a situation. You’re allowed to use the sidewalk if you’re younger than 10 yo. It’s plain illegal for people older than that. In the city cars have to keep a minimum distance of 1.5m to bicycles, that’s about 5 feet in crazy people’s units. Usually that means the car drivers are forced to switch lanes when going past a bicycle. And it’s a bit more sideways distance outside of the cities. All of those rules are written in blood. We’re not good at sharing the roads, but car drivers slowly learn to abide by the law and actually keep that distance, it’s really getting better in recent times. (But far from perfect.) And my city is half-heartedly building some more bicycle lanes and seperate small roads across the city, exclusive to bicycles. All of that is a major effort and we still get accidens on a regular basis.

Take care.

As I said I don’t know how driving is in the US. I heard it’s really bad in some places. I know it’s the way we do it here. There is just one road and cars and bicycles need to get along and share it. It’s not always easy, you’re right with that. But the sideway isn’t an option. Pedestrians and bicycles don’t mix well and there regularly are really bad accidents. And the cyclists also get killed by cars there.

There are studies. You end up having a 10x or 20x higer chance to die when cycling on the sideway by being missed by a car driver (I forgot the exact numbers). You can try and mitigate for that by really paying attention yourself, slowing down etc. Keeping track of all the cars around you. I’m not sure if you end up at the same chance to die as if you were cycling on the street. I’d hop off my bike and walk it across the junction if i were on the sideway.

Btw. is it legal to cycle on a sideway where you live?

It’s because you’re exactly in their blind spot. If they’re on the street and you’re on the sidewalk next to them. They’ll run you over at the next junction, as it has happened in this case. It’s always right turns and things to the side of cars. And you’ll be exactly there when cycling on the sidewalk.

Additionally car drivers don’t anticipate fast moving things on the sidewalk. They’ll have a quick glance at the sidewalk directly before and after the junction. Because a pedestrian can only move so far in the time until they made the turn. Then they’ll watch out for other traffic on the street, signals and so on. In the meantime you’ll emerge out of nowhere on the pavement, moving at 5x the speed of anything that’s anticipated to be there and that’s going to be a problem.

I don’t know how it’s in the US. But generally you should just cycle in plain sight directly infront of them on the road. It’s difficult to miss that.

I think you’re completely right with that assessment. Journalist used to be a reputable profession. And explaining things and processing raw information into something that can be consumed by the reader, deemed important. Especially getting it right. There is a whole process to it if you do it professionally. And curating content and deciding what is significant and gets an audience is equally as important.

Doing away with all of that is like replacing your New York Times with your 5-year-old and whatever she took from watching the news.

Yeah, I think comments shouldn’t vanish along with a deleted post. And posts and comments shouldn’t get automatically deleted alongside an account. Somehow everything is just the other way around here. And it’s rarely a good thing.