인용으로 어느 분이 올려주셨는데 정말 오피셜하게 지역 아이돌인 듯. x.com/lumate1217/s...

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:a6qvfkbrohedqy3dt6k5mdv6/post/3mgp2v74psc25

The “BOY HOWDY!” heard around the room:

A #FreeBSD 16.0-CURRENT boot environment on a 15.0-RELEASE made with OccamBSD imagine.sh and propagate.sh, which use makefs(8) and mkimg(1) internally, and packaged base…

We can have nice things!

I’m sure there are remaining rough edges but IT CAN BE DONE.

You’re welcome.

今アカウント作りました。はじめましてえええええええええええ！！！！！！！！！！！
みなさああああああああああん！！！！！！！！！！こんにちは！あああああああ！！！！！！！！何からしたらいいのかなーーーーーー！！ありがとうございましたああああ！！！！！

„Frieden wird es erst geben wenn Araber ihre Kinder mehr lieben als sie uns hassen. [...] Wer Israel angreift, bekommt es mit Deutschland zu tun.”

— Cem Özdemir, 20.05.2021 auf einer Pro-Israel Demo, anfangs zitierend Golda Meir, ehemalige Ministerpräsidentin Israels.

1. 뷔페는 서양 문물이다
2. 일본에 뷔페가 들어왔다
3. 한자로 번역해서 自助(지죠)식당이라고 부르기 시작한다
4. 중국이 그걸 알게 됐다
5. 저건 自助(쯔쥬)식당인가보다 한다
6. 그리고 셀프 서비스가 들어가는 것들은 다 自助를 붙이기 시작했다
7. ???
8. PROFIT!

🕐 2026-03-11 06:00 UTC

📰 デバッグはもう人間の仕事ではなくなった (👍 93)

🇬🇧 AI agents now handle most debugging by accessing production DBs, logs & Sentry directly. Multiple agents test hypotheses in parallel with peer review.
🇰🇷 AI 에이전트가 프로덕션 DB, 로그, Sentry에 직접 접근해 대부분의 디버깅을 처리. 여러 에이전트가 가설을 병렬로 검증하고 리뷰.

🔗 https://zenn.dev/dinii/articles/debugging-is-solved

#AI #Debugging #ClaudeCode #Zenn

Roblox is minting teen millionaires

Link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-06/roblox-s-teen-millionaires-are-disrupting-the-gaming-industry
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47293337

소셜미디어 페이스북의 모회사 메타가 ‘인공지능(AI)들의 소셜미디어’ 몰트북을 인수합니다. 인간을 대신하는 인공지능 에이전트 시대의 생태계를 선점하려는 움직임으로 풀이됩니다.

메타, ‘AI들의 소셜미디어’ 몰트북 인수…생태계 선점...

강아지들이 미용을 했어요(짱구 타이틀 읽는 톤)

레바논 지역당국 등에 따르면 알라이 신부는 전날 이스라엘의 탱크 공격으로 사망했다. 그는 다친 민간인들을 돕기 위해 현장에 갔다가 뒤따른 공격에 희생된 것으로 전해졌다. 등록 2026-03-10 17:57

레바논 지역당국 등에 따르면 알라이 신부는 전날 이스라...

get in! i guess Apple makes good laptops

What's My JND? 0.0022
Can you beat it? https://www.keithcirkel.co.uk/whats-my-jnd/?r=ANkgKP__89fU

이런사람이 운영하는 리딩방 퍽이나 가고싶겠다

そういえばしばらくぶりにskeb募集してますのでよろしくね。週末には閉めます
https://skeb.jp/@Yu_C_Blossom

'건강 이상설' 최불암 측 "재활치료 하며 회복 중…MBC 다큐로 복귀" 등록 2026-03-11 14:41

'건강 이상설' 최불암 측 "재활치료 하며 회복 중…M...

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

J⇔M アニメ化ですと！！

https://x.com/hartamanga/status/2031296774607090038?t=bNC21G65aTaL3RIuYu_rJg&s=19

youtu.be/Pq12GuQw0_c?... 사람이 아닌, AI를 위한 프로그램이라니..... 이제 프로그램의 방향이 이런식으로 흘러가는거냐고....

구글 신제품 때문에 완전히 멘탈이 나가버린 유저들

„Zunehmende Verrohung der Plattform“: #Süddeutsche Zeitung verlässt #X

Die Süddeutsche #Zeitung zieht sich von der Plattform des #US-Milliardärs #ElonMusk zurück.

https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/zunehmende-verrohung-der-plattform-sueddeutsche-zeitung-verlaesst-x-100.html

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

트위터 섀도밴인지 아닌지 모르겠어서 잠시 마스토돈 온 상태

일시적 현상이라 좀 있다 다시 트위터로 감

심지어 똘삼 본인보다 사모펀드(?)가 수익률이 높다

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

기업들, 하청노조 교섭 요구 사실 공고…포스코는 "법적 판단받아 교섭" 적시 쿠팡CLS, 하청노조 교섭 수용…지방공공기관도 지방정부 상대 단체교섭 나서 등록 2026-03-10 17:37

기업들, 하청노조 교섭 요구 사실 공고…포스코는 "법적...

튜링의 사과 자율형공간에서 머리 식힐 겸 즐길 수 있도록
옛날 추억의 오락실 게임기를 구비 해놨습니다.🕹️

Zeitenwende, „whatever it takes”, den Gürtel enger schnallen, jetzt wissen wir auch warum!

French judge Nicolas Guillou working for the ICC in the Netherlands still sanctioned. Canadian judge Kimberly Prost too. Fmr commissioner Thierry Breton too. Hateaid @hateaid too.

Foreign tech bro oligarchy.

#decolonisation #sovereignty

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/feb/18/international-criminal-court-icc-judges-trump-sanctions

그 역시 체코를 '객원 참가국' 정도로 바라보는 시선을 거부한다. 체르벤카는 "우리는 야구를 하러 왔다. 참가 자격을 얻은 데는 이유가 있다. 우리가 다른 직업을 가졌다는 사실이 우리가 여기까지 오기 위해 이룬 성과를 없던 것으로 만들지는 않는다"고 밝혔다.

그 역시 체코를 '객원 참가국' 정도로 바라보는 시선을...

Where are the European Googles and Facebooks? From Arte.

FR: https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/121620-127-A/ou-sont-les-google-et-facebook-europeens/?utm_source=android&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=121620-127-A
DE: https://www.arte.tv/de/videos/121620-127-A/ou-sont-les-google-et-facebook-europeens/?utm_source=android&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=121620-127-A

#DigitalSovereignty

今日寒いね

I was doing shorts long before tiktok and youtube you know. Short music though, so nothing that should rot your brain from the outside in.

Need something snappy for your next project?
Perhaps you want an indefinite loop so you don't have to think about it and can just fade when ready? No problem.
You could turn some into ring tones too if you felt like it.
Anyway, here's a collection of 180 Shorts, 1210 total items that won't cost you anything.

One click to play, one click to download, no hoops to jump through at all.
My site doesn't require cookie consent, your last five years of social media accounts, the email address you used in school you'd rather forget about, nope.
Listen, download, share and enjoy. That's it.

https://hear-me.social/@Onj/115690218302125927

NEW: A group of hacktivists calling themselves "Department of Peace" claims to have hacked an office wihin the Department of Homeland Security.

The hacktivists leaked data on more than 6,000 contracts between DHS and ICE and private companies to the transparency website Distributed Denial of Secrets.

"The DHS is killing us and people deserve to know which companies support them and what they’re working on,” the hackers wrote in a manifesto.

http://techcrunch.com/2026/03/02/hacktivists-claim-to-have-hacked-homeland-security-to-release-ice-contract-data/

그러고보니 오늘새벽인가에
10세대 스타팅3인이 공개되면서
포켓몬 총 마릿수가
일본초등학생이 6년동안 배우는
모든 한자의 갯수를 뛰어넘었다는
글을 봤어

Writing my own text editor, and daily-driving it

Link: https://blog.jsbarretto.com/post/text-editor
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47331034

Turns out we've all been saying Linus differently...

But here's how Linus Torvalds himself says it! 😆

#linux

금융감독원이 ‘엔화 반값 환전 오류’가 발생한 토스뱅크에 대한 현장점검에 착수했습니다. 토스뱅크 쪽 손실 규모는 최대 100억원대로 추정됩니다.

금감원, ‘엔화 반값 오류' 토스뱅크 현장점검…100억...

병원 가기 귀찮은데 이제 약 끊어도 되는 부분 아님? ㅋㅋㄹㅇ루삥뽕~

​​

김도 해킹당햇나

ぬもさんはコミッションを募集しています！

まったり描くので納期は最大にしております🙇
もしよかったらよろしくお願いします！！
https://skeb.jp/@numonyat #Skeb #Commission @skeb_jpSkeb より

I'm writing this in English.

Not because English is my first language—it isn't. I'm writing this in English because if I wrote it in Korean, the people I'm addressing would run it through an outdated translator, misread it, and respond to something I never said. The responsibility for that mistranslation would fall on me. It always does.

This is the thing Eugen Rochko's post misses, despite its good intentions.

@GargronEugen Rochko argues that LLMs are no substitute for human translators, and that people who think otherwise don't actually rely on translation. He's right about some of this. A machine-translated novel is not the same as one rendered by a skilled human translator. But the argument rests on a premise that only makes sense from a certain position: that translation is primarily about quality, about the aesthetic experience of reading literature in another language.

For many of us, translation is first about access.

The professional translation market doesn't scale to cover everything. It never has. What gets translated—and into which languages—follows the logic of cultural hegemony. Works from dominant Western languages flow outward, translated into everything. Works from East Asian languages trickle in, selectively, slowly, on someone else's schedule. The asymmetry isn't incidental; it's structural.

@GargronEugen Rochko notes, fairly, that machine translation existed decades before LLMs. But this is only half the story, and which half matters depends entirely on which languages you're talking about. European language pairs were reasonably serviceable with older tools. Korean–English, Japanese–English, Chinese–English? Genuinely usable translation for these pairs arrived with the LLM era. Treating “machine translation” as a monolithic technology with a uniform history erases the experience of everyone whose language sits far from the Indo-European center.

There's also something uncomfortable in the framing of the button-press thought experiment: “I would erase LLMs even if it took machine translation with it.” For someone whose language has always been peripheral, that button looks very different. It's not an abstract philosophical position; it's a statement about whose access to information is expendable.

I want to be clear: none of this is an argument that LLMs are good, or that the harms @GargronEugen Rochko describes aren't real. They are. But a critique of AI doesn't become more universal by ignoring whose languages have always been on the margins. If anything, a serious critique of AI's political economy should be more attentive to those asymmetries, not less.

The fact that I'm writing this in English, carefully, so it won't be misread—that's not incidental to my argument. That is my argument.

연성은 어느지경까지 가냐면...
내 머릿속에 아직도 못 그린 그림이 4년째 있음

RE: https://mastodon.social/@fj/116208501129052185

So many legal and policy experts blindly trust PhotoDNA as a useful tool to act on illegal content. It’s good to see technical experts deep dive into this!