Cool resource.

Took me a bit to find it, so for anyone curious:

"All game assets found on the asset page are public domain CC0 licensed..."

There is a small FAQ if you click Support at the page bottom.

It is also stated on every asset page :)

Info from the FAQ:

- Currently using Mistral 7B, but ability (by Mozilla) to swap the model used to another open source at any point.

- Hosted "by Mozilla" on their GCP instance.

- No obvious info about what it will cost them to run this since it is free to use.

- No training on user data.

Like others here, I'm very curious about the cost for Mozilla to run this service. It may be less than it initially appears given the 7B model they chose. I do wish they would focus their efforts on creating a very long-term endowment to pay devs for continued Firefox development in lieu of projects like this given the tenuous situation with their Google funding.

I'm not against this kind of thing in theory, but I hope it's being done in a cost-sustainable way.

If you scroll to the bottom of the page it appears like this is made by Fakespot, https://www.fakespot.com/our-mission. They explain that they make money through ads, for their other similar product, wouldn't be far to guess that's the future strategy here as well.

I wasn't able to get many decent results after playing with the demo for some time. I guess my question is...what exactly is this for? I was able to get substantially better results about 2 years ago running SD 2 locally on a gaming laptop. Sure, the images took 30 seconds or so each, but the quality was better than I could get in the demo. Not sure what the point of instantly generating a ton of bad quality images is.

What am I missing?

Here's 2.1 demo, released 2 years ago, for comparison: https://huggingface.co/spaces/stabilityai/stable-diffusion

Nothing. This is useful as cool feature and for demos. Maybe some application in cheap entertainment

It does seem like this is one of those domains where new AI models could thrive. From my understanding, the amount and variety of data necessary to make these models work is huge. In addition to historical data, you've got constant satellite data, weather stations on the ground for data collection, weather balloons going high into the atmosphere multiple times daily per location, Doppler radars tracking precipitation, data from ships and other devices in the ocean measuring temps and other info, and who knows what else.

It's incredible that we are able to predict anything this far into the future, but the complexity seems like it lends itself to this kind of black box approach.

*This is all speculation, so I'd be grateful if someone more knowledgeable could tell if if I'm mistaken about these assumptions. It's an interesting topic.

That's part of the story.

The real reason why this is a domain where AI models can thrive is actually because we already have extremely complex, well-developed, physics-based simulations of the atmosphere which can take all of these observations and do useful things with them. So the task we currently ask AI models to do with regards to weather forecasting is actually much, much simpler than what you're proposing - we're simply asking the AI models to emulate what these existing models are capable of doing.

Actually doing useful things with the observations alone is a different story altogether. It's the fact that we've been developing computer simulations of the weather and climate since the 1950's that is the key enabler here.

No problems here with a very similar setup (22.04, Firefox), and this is on a 2015 laptop. Very stable and uses very little background resources.

I am running unlock origin and privacy badger, but they don't block much of anything there.

Ok, thanks, maybe it is time for me to run a memtest.

This looks very interesting and I'm checking out the details now.

Btw, the link on the site to your GitHub repo has an extra dash, so it's leading to a 404.

I like the general idea of this, but this feels like it is trying to do too much. Removing ads, trackers, and unnecessary widgets is mostly a solved problem using unlock origin (+ possibly privacy badger).

I think it is a step too far to try and completely remove the step of actually visiting the website you get content from. This is the same thing Google is trying to do with their AI summarizer in search. Is the expected endgame of this that all useful websites just shut down because no one but bots visits them anymore? Even if those sites are user-funded and not reliant on ads, I find it hard to believe that many people would use AI summaries from the site then subsequently donate to financially support it.

I'm much more in favor of an approach that involves still visiting the actual website, but removes the content that the user does not want to see (ublock origin style).

I would suggest that once the browser extension exists, that it should transform the site "in-place" after visiting the site then pressing a button on the extension. And I could see that potentially having value (but I suspect this would take a lot of work to get right).

Just to say: I wouldn't use privacy badger with uo. In my experience, broke a lot of sites.

I genuinely think this is a great thing to offer and very much needed. Great work. Your ffmpeg tutorial also looks really interesting, and I'll definitely be checking that out when I have time.

But please consider removing or changing that huge cookie banner on the main page. The amount of people that will simply choose to not interact with the site at all and X out immediately when seeing this might be higher than you think. That would be my first instinct.

Thank you so much for your feedback, someone before you already mentioned the cookie banner thing, and I was just working on it. Although can't remove but made it way smaller.

It's for comments like the above that this is a terrible place to ask for feedback on what you've done.

I don't think people realise how much of a weird bubble this site is. Take the comments above about how you like learning stuff but most people don't:

That means WE'RE the weird ones, not most people!

The last thing you want is people like us giving feedback. Also the F-Droid stuff... I mean come on.

Your target market is clueless. They don't care about cookies banners, advanced customisation, software freedoms, etc. They just want to message their grandkids online and are probably terrified of being scammed out of their savings. They probably don't like change or learning complicated new things either.

But hey, I'm not one. Go and speak to your market and see what they want, if anything. And ignore 95% of comments here. Most people aren't as paranoid as techies.

Honestly, this is just repulsive. Crypto has brought nearly zero benefits to society and has made income inequality even worse. Not to mention the environmental impact.

I don't see how any reasonable person can celebrate this. Ask yourself who is benefiting most from this.

Just because you don't see the benefits, it doesn't mean they are not there. You don't know how bitcoin affected people's life and how they use it.

Decentralization helps a lot of people who may be under government pressure/being monitored, for example if you’re an anti-government russian journalist, you’d ideally use crypto as they would be able to freeze your assets.

Lots of citizens of sanctioned countries aren’t able to use their credit/debit cards to shop online outside of their country, paying with crypto or even using something like a SolCard fixes that.

It’s also generally convenient, there’s no other realistic and accessible way to transfer any sum of money, whether $10 or $10M, for a $2 fee nearly instantly.

You make a very good point about "good" option source options. There are also situations where plenty of open tools exist, but whole-system complexity is such that people choose proprietary/managed options anyway. Email hosting comes to mind.