Simulated Intelligence

Goddamn, do I hate AI as it is presently defined. The best I could describe it as being is simulated intelligence. Perhaps, to your ear, it sounds like the same thing - but it isn't. The key distinction is that the present systems are simulating intelligence rather than any form of actual intelligence. Perhaps, sometimes, it gets close to a coherent response but that is purely accidental.

 

 

 

At best, the system can regurgitate the content it stole trained upon, but then, what value is AI providing? It's an insult to intelligence that these trillion dollar companies somehow think that this horse and pony show is anything but smoke and mirrors. No one who actually knows how these models works would say they're intelligent. Zero context and zero comprehension is made when it comes to forming their response. Let that sink in:

 

 

 

How the ''''AI''''  system actually works

All that the present AI system does is this: you have a question and then you have a 'golden' response. And then you keep training the model until the system spits out something closely resembling the golden response. For example, you have a question of what's 1 + 1? Then initially the system may spit out dog or Adolf Hitler and slowly it will eventually move towards a number. Maybe it will spit out 3 then 45 then 11 then, finally, it will mostly respond with 2.

Note that I used the word 'mostly' - that's because all that happens is a number of weighted gates are calculated so that you will mostly get 2 but sometimes you may get 'go kill yourself.' Because all those weights are just probabilities rather than guarantees. You cannot guarantee that 2 will be presented for all situations. It has no understanding of what 1 is or what adding 1 to another number is. All it has is its weighted trees and zero comprehension of what it's actually doing. If you want the results from addition to be guaranteed, just use a calculator.

 

 

I honestly don't know how all the tech magnates don't realise how fallible the current 'AI solution' is. When the general public is staunchly against AI and those in the know (ahem) know how weak the current solution is, the level of financial collapse caused by these glue-eating CEO's will be catastrophic. It's only the financial circle jerk between the AI leaders which keeps these transparent clothes from falling apart. This all amounts to another Ponzi scheme (cough, crypto, cough) where the rich get richer while the poor somehow still end up paying for it. 

 

Humanity is circling around the drain

Good god, is the world taking the fun out of existing. Everything is getting enshittified and (apparently) we can't do anything about it. Whether it's AI getting force-fed down our throats, to the anonymity of the internet being threatened, to stupid articles being pay-walled (perhaps they see the irony), I'm getting tired of being forced to find ways to get what was promised to me when the internet first began.

Back in the halcyon days of 28.8bps modems and venerated search engines going by the name of Yahoo (which kids would nowadays say ya who?), we had the altruistic view that information would always be free and search engines would, shock horror, actually aim to improve their technology to find the best results. And all was good in the world. We had people writing blogs (how old-fashioned), we had geocities, we had myspace, we even had murmerings of a new upstart going by the name of google which was promising an even better experience than the much vaunted Yahoo. And so, we accepted this new upstart and we accepted The Facebook and we accepted Instagram and we accepted ... and so on.

 

Flash-forward to today, and everything is commoditised, every internet activity is tracked, and every single ad is tailored. All our activities have become opaque to the data pillaging from corporate and, seemingly, we're unable to do anything about it. Firefox just announced that it's going to become an AI browser, Microsoft also announced that Windows is going to become agentic, and I have just announced that I would have to be catatonic if I were to accept that.

 

 

I have taken a few steps to sidestepping this. I am Technology, so I do have choices. The first choice is operating systems.

•  I have installed Linux Mint
• All my hardware was automatically detected and works flawlessly 
• It also came preinstalled with Libre Office (Microsoft Office facsimile)
• I installed Lutris / Steam / Heroic for my gaming needs
• I installed gitcola for my git repo needs
• I installed Unreal Engine for my game dev needs
• I installed Winboat (alongside a fully neutered and containered Win11 VM) that handles any must-have Windows needs
• Prior to Mozilla's announcement, I was using Firefox - now, I'm leaning towards LibreWolf (a forked privacy-focussed Firefox)
• I also installed Waterfox on my android, which is (surprise, surprise) a privacy-focussed fork of Firefox 
• I will also install a Pi-hole internet proxy which will block even my TV from presenting ads to me
• I am vengeance

Now, this may seem quite daunting for the average user but, outside of Winboat having a few challenges, I would say the switch was pretty easy. Most linux distros (i.e. variants of linux) come with a package manager. Think of it like Steam, where you pick and choose what software you want to install ... and it just installs ... and it's also free.

If this isn't the (pending) year of Linux, I don't know when it could possibly be as, for me, I've had a far better and easier experience than anything Windows is doing right now. I have always wanted an alternative to Microsoft's stranglehold and, thankfully, Microsoft has bitten my hand one too many times for me to let it slide. I've now taken this metaphorical mangey mutt out the back and finally put it to rest.

Although, perhaps not all is lost. There is still at least one plucky billion-dollar company which seemingly still fights for the people. Valve (the people behind Steam) have also announced a new Steam box and VR system which will all run native linux and provide a console/VR experience that even Grandma can use. And the best part is these systems will just be PC's so you can even install Windows if you like. You own the hardware. We may be at the end times for corporate, but Valve may have provided a glimmer of a future worth sticking around for.

The saga continues (Oh, Microsoft)

On the quest to make my PC all parts ninja I bought a 240Hz variable-refresh-rate monitor. Considering that when you plug a monitor into your PC it does a little handshake to tell the PC which resolutions and refresh rates it supports, you would think that Windows 10 would be smart enough to realise that you wish to use the highest and fastest refresh rate your monitor allows.

 

 

Apparently Microsoft doesn't think so, because your ninja monitor will be set to 60Hz by default. For many less tech-savvy users they will be placebo'd into thinking that their high-refresh-rate monitor is amazing - while only gaming at 60Hz. Even if you have a frame counter stating that you're hitting 200+ FPS (frames per second), if Windows 10 hasn't been enabled to utilize 240Hz, you will still only be playing at 60 FPS. And if you look at your display settings, there isn't any clear indicator of what refresh rate your monitor is running because Microsoft, in their infinite wisdom, decided that displaying the refresh rate of your monitor was too technical - just because. For those who are wondering, here are the steps you need to walk through to get to the monitor refresh rate:

• Open Settings → Display Settings
• Click on Advanced Display Settings (scroll down)
• Click on Display Adapter properties
• Click on Monitors tab
• View/Adjust the refresh rate from the drop-down

 

It's only in that last step that you can even see which refresh rate you're currently using. This seems so ... unnecessary and, really, it is. I don't know of anyone who would use a lesser refresh rate for their target resolution so why does Windows 10 default to 60Hz in the first place? I guess a few years back 60Hz monitors were the standard but as we all know the times, they are a-changing and it seems clear that Microsoft hasn't yet got the memo.

 

How not to fix racism

So, I came across an article which points out that one of the Microsoft gaming heads stated that there needs to be more black leaders ... whatever that means. My first thought, even before I even read the article was, aren't you missing the point? How exactly do you fix this 'racist gaming industry' by simply appointing a person not based upon their abilities but the colour of their skin?

Now, before you think I'm some kind of bigoted white supremacist, don't you think I have at least an iota of a point? I'd like to think I would never judge a person based upon their outward appearance but rather their actions. That is not to say that I haven't prejudged - I am human after all - but at least on a few occasions my initial prejudice has proven to be incorrect. We as a society have yet to reach the zenith of treating all humans as equal (until their actions say otherwise.) It is unfortunate that in many circumstances we have yet to even strive towards removing these biases - but that doesn't excuse taking the opposite approach of promoting <under-represented minority> for the sole reason that they are an <under-represented minority.> This is working under the misconception that every gender, race, creed and so forth should be uniformly represented in their institution ... which is fundamentally wrong.

Dave Chappelle, you genius

If you still remain unconvinced, I will point you to mathematics as your source for what should be deemed a truly unbiased representation. In mathematics, if you were to graph an unweighted and truly random distribution, you would note that with a reasonable sample size there would be perceived clumping and outliers - that is, certain areas of the graph would be perceived as being 'unfairly weighted' in comparison to other sparser sections. This is to be expected. What would not be expected, however, would be a uniform straight line distribution - this, contrarily speaking, would be perceived as a non-uniform distribution. That is not to say that it isn't possible - just that the chances of a completely balanced distribution being graphed from randomly-generated values would be astronomically unlikely.

 

By taking a truly unbiased perspective and employing, promoting and befriending based upon a persons' actions, you will truly reach a moment in humanity where biases can be set aside. That is the future I look forward to ... but I don't think I'll see in my lifetime.

Oh, Microsoft

You would think that with all the billions in your bank account you would direct a few more dollars towards your marketing department. Case in point: the current naming scheme of the Xbox. The first release was unimaginatively called the Xbox - or DirectX Box. For those not in the know, Windows uses DirectX for all its graphical and audio needs, and so, Xbox was basically a Windows PC which can only play games. This was then followed on by Xbox 360 ... and then the Xbox One - or X-Bone. Colour me confused - the marketeers had somehow created a new numbering system where they go from (1) to 360 and then back to one.

 

And all would be right with the world if their marketeers had just left it at that. They then decided that they would fragment the X-Bone with the X-Bone S (which is the refactored/diskless version) and X-Bone X (which is the slightly more powerful version of the stock X-Bone). They then decided that this wasn't confusing enough so the next generation of XBox will be known as - wait for it - the Xbox Series X (for the top-end version) and the Xbox Series S (which is the less powerful than the Series X and less powerful than the X-Bone X ... but with raytracing). I look forward to having parents around the world picking up the last generation X-Bone X and thinking they got a good deal on their next-gen console.

Notably, the Xbox Series X can be (puerilely) abbreviated to Xbox SeX. At this time I must think the marketeers are leaning into their five-year-old mentality - or they're taking a leaf out of Musk's playbook. Whatever the case, having two different hardware targets will cause fragmentation and result in sub-par releases for the top-end version as developers will not be arsed utilising the full capabilities of the top-end if that means having to dedicate twice the level of effort testing and optimising for two different hardware targets. Even if I'm a PlayStation fanboy, the two PS5 versions scheduled for release will utilise the same hardware for both the disk and non-disk version. There won't be any fragmentation and will result in games fully utilizing hardware (if the developer is worth their salt.) 

 I don't enjoy any company merely being successful because there's no competition - we are all better for a healthy triopoly (if you include Nintendo) as that will force all parties to do their best. I really hope that I am wrong with regards to the next-gen XBox's ... but my spider senses are tingling even now.

Kick 'em while they're down

It's that time again to have a tech post - bear with me while I vent.

Poor old Microsoft. Even if they made 6 billion in profit last quarter they still apparently cannot afford to buy a clue. I am, of course, talking about their ongoing failure to extend into markets with anything that doesn't contain the word 'office' or 'windows' in it. I guess the one exception would be the xbox but if that's your only hit (in how many years?), it's a little alarming. I would never have thought a multi-billion dollar company would be an underdog but that's how I see them at this point in time. Here's the list of attempts to remain cool and relevant:

• Windows Phone - owns 4% of the market after two years.
• Surface RT (AKA Microsoft iPad (AKA 'the neutered Windows 8 tablet')) - not even 1% of the market and no chance of improving.
• Surface Pro (AKA 'proper Windows 8 tablet') - not even 1% of the market and only a slight chance of this improving.
• Windows 8 (AKA 'the finger paint OS') - apparently so bad it's causing a mass defection to OSX or motivating people to upgrade back to Windows 7.

Doesn't look good, does it? On windows 8, I think the major failing is that it is trying to be everything. I can understand that you would want a touch interface if you're using a tablet but it should not force professionals to swipe with the bluntness of an index finger every time you want to do something. But enough about that. I would rather suggest ways in which they can attempt to solve most of their issues:

• Release a desktop version of Windows 8
  
  The 'iphone/ipad' users can have Windows 8 touch and the rest of us can have a 'non-touch version' that does proper multi-tasking and has minimal fluff to get in the way of actually being productive.
• Remove the desktop interface from Windows 8 touch
  
  In the immortal words of Steve Jobs: duh. If you're doing a touch interface, then damn-well do a touch interface. Do not pollute the environment with a wishy-washy kinda-sorta experience. Commit to it and own it.
• Hold off on releasing Surface Pro/RT
  
  Too late. Just as Jar-jar got canned in subsequent Star Wars films when everyone despised the poorly-masqueraded 'black subservient slave' alien (shame on you George Lucas), Microsoft should realise that throwing out a tablet PC to the masses with an OS that most people don't like is probably not wise.
• Consolidate the Windows 8 touch/phone user experience
  
  Ideally 'W8T' should emulate the same experience whether it's on the phone, tablet or a touch-enabled laptop. It's close but not close enough. Also, it wouldn't hurt to share settings/preferences/mail/messages etc. between devices.
• Make it Grandma-proof on 'Windows 8 touch'
  
  If people have to follow tutorials or search the internet on how to login, close a program or logout, you know you didn't get it right. Use your mothers/grandmothers. If they don't know how to do something, go back to the drawing board until they do.
• Give your OS a simple name
  'Windows 8 touch' is a'ight but I would just call it 'touch' (or possibly Windows Touch) and the other one should be called 'Windows Business' (because that's your market).
• If the device doesn't have a touch-sensitive screen, do not install Windows 8 Touch
  Do I need to explain this point?
• Lose the Ballmer
  He is an embarrassment and lacks any form of vision outside of a reactionary one.

UPDATE: I think I might be goddamn soothsayer. Ballmer's out, the windows phone is dead, they're reintroducing a desktop version and they're aligning their OS's UI based upon whether it's touch-based or not (i.e. mouse/keyboard guys gets Windows 7 UI, touch gets the blergh instead). The only thing left is to fix the touch UI (never gonna happen) and for the names to be simplified.  Anyways, my job here is done *drops mike*

Always the bridesmaid

It is comical to see how Microsoft always plays catch up to the trends that 'catch them by surprise' on an unerringly common basis. Whether they can turn around their rudderless boat is anyone's guess but I do hope they do (I do love a multi-Billion dollar underdog).

After having a pretty good lead in the smart phone market, Microsoft had squandered their market share and now are playing catch up (once again) to attempt to squeeze out a single-percent share of the market with their new Windows Phone. This reactionary strategy involved going into partnership with an ailing phone company that had also squandered their market share through a lack of innovation and forward movement. To sweeten the deal, Microsoft paid Nokia more than $1 Billion for exclusivity.

Now, as part of their strategy to react to a burgeoning ebook market, they have gone into business with Barnes & Noble who are presently playing second fiddle to Amazon and has paid approximately 300 million for the privilege. Whether two average companies makes one competent one is anyone's guess, but it would be good for there to be at least two major players to keep the other from gouging the authors, publishers and consumers. Well, here's to competition - cheers!

Luddites unite

I've finally arrived, dragging my heels and decrying my hatred for change. Yes, I have Window 7 and it is great*

*Your experiences may vary depending on whether you've followed the necessary steps listed below:

1. Remove Aero. Yes, I said it.
   Who wants indeterminant active windows of a translucent nature when you can have clearly-defined windows that don't sap CPU and memory just for the sake of some 'bling'? Yes aero is 'sexy' but it is useless.
   
   

   

   Which one is active? ... hmmm let me see.

   
   
2. Replace the mindf*** that is the default start menu.
   I'm not sure on what planet they thought that searching for each program you wish to run was a good idea.
   
   Sure, it remembers the last most-recent programs you ran but it doesn't maintain the order so it's pot luck each time you click on start. I recommend using classic shell - it's free and very powerful and, if you're still feeling masochistic, you can instantly revert to the old menu just by holding down shift.
   
   

   

   I pity tha fool who prefers the left-hand side 

   
   

   As an added bonus, I'm able to have a separate restart/hibernate/shut down as the good lord dictates.

   
   
3. Remembering where the icons are placed on your desktop should be out of the box, shouldn't it? Shouldn't it? Well, it isn't, so there is an app for that (thank you apple). So next time your screen decides to futz and bugger your icon locations, turn to this to avoid irritation. You are welcome.
   
   
4. Being able to delete a folder that is somehow locked by another process should be your god-given right, shouldn't it? Well it isn't but there is a fix for that.
   
   
5. Are those favourites / libraries links annoying you and taking up unnecessary space in windows explorer?
   Well, there is a hack for that.
   
   

   

   Not quite sure how they ever thought that was a good idea...

   
   
6. Is the task bar hiding all your active processes under one icon while you manically try to determine which of the mini windows is actually the process you want to open?
   Well, there's a fix for that. Actually, it's just a tweak, thank goodness. Microsoft had a bit of foresight this time and decided not to hard-code it in. Right-click on start bar, select properties and then select 'never combine' next to task bar buttons and the horrors abate once more.
   
   

   

   ...the horror

   
   

   After all that you have something you can actually use, well, I can use. Maybe I'm just dragging my knuckles into the next decade of this millennia, but I think these changes make windows useful once more. It makes using windows intuitive and productive which I'm not sure I can say about the default version.

   
   

   At least with Windows 7 they fixed the control panel - it is so streamlined that it becomes second nature. It's brilliant not having to traverse multiple disconnected and ambiguously-named pages to change a single setting. It's brilliant automatically knowing where the setting is without having to use google. Yes. Well done Microsoft.

Back-patters unite

It seems Steve Buscemi has expanded his range into shilling for mundane-looking Nokia devices.

I can't believe they were able to pad eight minutes basically saying, we created a plastic case for a phone. I guess, if I thought hard enough, I could spruik the virtues and collaborative energies that went into designing a tic-tac.

Such as:

"We really moved towards a collaborative design where the virtues of our product were paramount to the satisfaction and intuitive application. Take the white colour. It promotes a simple and clean notion that appeals to the eye and motivates them to pick it up. A lot of consideration went into the texturing. It should feel smooth and sublime when held in your hand, but still retain some tactile friction so that it has a degree of resistance as you caress it in your hand.

The overall shape of the tic-tac is a work of genius.

It is cylindrical in shape, but feels solid to the touch. It has a smooth, straight body which entices the handler to reach out and touch it. This is complemented by round ends which promote further touch.  See how your finger rolls naturally over the surface; it feels exciting to hold between your forefinger and thumb. The rounded ends allow smooth application into your mouth, emulating the smooth rounded surface of your teeth. The white shade and shape are implicitly designed with the intention of promoting its application into your mouth. It's a wonder of subliminal imagery.

The tactile layering of the content is a work of genius.."

And so on. God, I can't believe I just did that. I feel so dirty. The hilarity of this eight-minute video is that they simply created a case. They already had the hardware. Just a matter of creating a case to hold in the stuff they already had and then plonking an operating system by microsoft and they're done.

Or am I missing something?

Truly visionary

This is the vision of future productivity from a company devoid of any:

Microsoft's 'vision' is of a future that is ruled by iPads and iPods and iDontCares.  Their only innovation in 30 years has been an ability to react to the vision of others. This certainly isn't my vision; it looks to me like an exercise in annoyance.  Unlike a lot of you, I see little attraction to a world of finger painting.  I'd much rather have a world where you're jacked in, similar to the Matrix.  That way we're not limited to a world where you're forced to interact with Kinect-like awkwardness.  Using the bluntness of a sausage as the sole source of interaction is my vision of hell.

I work in IT but I hate smart phones.  I'm a luddite when it comes to things that pinch or swipe.  My idea of an interface worth building is something that gives you instant access to what you want, without silly transitions, fade-ins and fade-outs.  All that crud just gets in the way of me getting where I need to go.  I think as a minor diversion they're fine but, for anything that demands a degree of productivity, I'd rather go back to a lump of coal and a rock wall than sit there drawing pictures for mummy and daddy.

My preferred method of interaction for productivity-based work is a keyboard.  I'm a 'keyboard guy,' which means that the majority of my interaction is preferably done with something that gives me near-instant response.  Having to drag an animated cursor across a screen with a mouse is just irritating when a single key press can do the same thing with an infinite degree more accuracy, speed and tactile response.

I think the future is something that works directly with your cortex.  Something that understands your thoughts and line of sight automatically so it works at the speed of a synapse.  Nanoseconds vs seconds.  It definitely should not be finger painting, although I doubt that my vision will be the future, given the short-sighted nature of this 'visionary look into the future.'