I don’t think the scientists abusing meth all have ADHD or they’d have meds prescribed by their doctor.

Then that’s an even worse analogy than I thought you were saying. I get what you’re trying to say, but it comes across as “well that other guy did something wrong, so I can do it too”.

And I know that’s not what you’re trying to say, but that’s how it reads.

I didn’t

Desoxyn is a brand name of methamphetamine hydrochloride. Literally the quintessential ADHD med.

It’s completely different than the street drug “meth”. The only similarity is the methyl-5 ingredient, which is a molecule that our body naturally synthesizes continuously.

It’s actually just one atom away!

That’s not really a good way to spin it. Having ADHD is nothing like functional alcoholism. An alcoholic is destructively addicted to alcohol, and a functional one is really good at hiding it.

ADHD is a condition outside of any external influence, and medication helps normalize individuals dealing with it.

Your approach is the logical equivalent of a burglar saying “I rob people’s homes because they have guns to defend themselves”.

you technically sort of are taking meth in a way

You are 100% NOT taking meth when you take ADHD stims. The only thing linking the two is the core ingredient which is a methyl-5 molecule, which your body makes on its own.

The drug meth is a synthetic methyl-5 compound with a ton of other nasty crap in it that doesn’t exist in ADHD medication.

Like I said, whoever says that is in the same group as the American cheese is almost plastic crowd.

Can you make something that works? Of course! Will it work as reliably as something made using better processes? Usually not.

Are you mad?!? My wife might read this!!

I’ve had someone tell me with a straight face that I’m “basically taking meth”.

This is the same kind of person that says “American cheese slices are one molecule away from being plastic!”

So the guys on the street that scam tourists are high profile scammers?

is still clunky compared to others.

Wut?

This isn’t even a joke. And I think this might actually happen at some point.

There’s no reason to believe that they’re federal agents if they refuse to show ID.

This is what I don’t understand. What’s then to prevent literally anyone else claiming to be from some other agency to intervene and say they can’t take the person away? And then claim they don’t need to show ID?

Even Tom Paris wanted buttons back

I did acknowledge that it’s not exclusive to the US. And I didn’t say “it is”, I said “it feels like”.

FTX, Theranos, Fyre Festival, Enron, Bernie Madoff, Logan Paul’s CrytoZoo, Charles Ponzi (the OG Ponzi scammer), etc.

While scams exist everywhere, the US seems specially suited to embolden people to run scams. At least high profile ones.

It’s a whole hell of a lot harder to rig when your name is everywhere when you win.

This also sounds like a uniquely US problem. Not that there aren’t scammers everywhere, but it feels like it would be more prevalent in the US.

ltt

Gross

Remember the other day when Microsoft boasted that 40% of their code is written by AI?

Plex (originally) and Jellyfin are a centralized way of managing your media with aesthetic and easy to use interfaces. I have one Jellyfin server and I have a Netflix/Display+ type interaction with my media. I have the same content on my phone, wife’s phone, my desktop, laptop, my TV, etc.

All watch history, recommendations, up next queue, and so on.

And with the right setup (Wireguard in my case) I can access that content from anywhere.

You are the one basing your argument on an article from 2008 , not me.

… what? You literally linked the article from Android Authority, not me.

You are completely deranged.

Says the person claiming a model’s computational power usage scales with the number of classes trained.

Now come back with some hard evidence

Hard evidence for what? I’ve never once claimed phones are listening to people’s conversations. This whole thread has been about the technical viability of such a system. Not evidence of it’s literal existence.

You, on the other hand, have spewed nonsense this whole time.

So like I’ve said more than once, come back with something real or stay in your lane.

I already did multiple times

No you didn’t, because you keep saying wrong things.

you just refuse to read it

I don’t need to read it, because I read it when it came out… back in 2008. I read their stuff regularly. I also read all the other stuff about this topic (AI tech). An article from 2008 is irrelevant at this point. Technology has advanced leaps and bounds in 17 years. AI wasn’t even a thing back then. Things like Picovoice didn’t even exist until recently.

It also says a lot that your source of truth is a near 20-year old article from Android Authority.

How often do you say Nike ?

Personally? Never.

More interesting would be “I will buy a pair of new shoes” now shoes can be mentioned in tons of context so you better have a way of separate it.

I don’t know about “interesting”, but I do agree that it would be much greater context to better target ads. But that’s not what the discussion was about. I said way back that I’m not positioning this idea of phone’s listening as an absolute certainty. My whole point was that at a technological level it’s well within technical means to accomplish the whole “our phones listen to what we say” all while not draining the battery enough to be outright noticeable.

Another thing to note, is that most (if not all) of the anecdotal stories about people talking about a topic and then seeing ads about that thing are often generic conversations. Even in my own tests, which are anecdotal, confirm that. I never talk about boating. I never search anything about boats. I also never saw any ads about boats. Etc. So I did a little test on my own recently and openly talked about “getting the boat ready”, “can’t wait to go boating next week”, “need to get the boat in the water and ready for the season”, and so on. I did this for about an hour solid. Then waited and hour and visited some generic websites that show ads, and lo and behold there were lots of ads for buying a new propeller, ads for nearby marinas, ads for marina supply shops, ads for boating accessories, and so on.

Like I said, it’s entirely anecdotal and in no way conclusive, but it does lead me to believe that there might be truth to the rumours. And it’s the kind of thing I’ve heard from many other technical people who deliberately tried to trigger ads on topics they never deal with otherwise.

And also like I said before either come back with something real, or go away and concede you’re out of your depth.