<gentoo joke>

There’s multiple studies that suggests that the psychological dependency is bidirectional where as pre-existing mental disorders can lead to cannabis dependency, cannabis dependency can lead to exacerbation of the pre-existing mental disorders, and excessive use can lead to trigging mental disorders you maybe genetically prone too and commonly psychosis. Psychosis has symptoms overlapping with schizophrenia, however you’re symptoms seem a bit extreme for Psychosis. Is there perhaps a history of schizophrenia &/or paranoid personality disorder in your family? If you don’t know, perhaps consider looking into it.

On the addiction aspect, the addiction stems from purely psychological, at least in my experience, unlike other drugs like nicotine which is chemical/physical addiction. I’ve smoked weed and tobacco/vapes, was at one point dependent on weed but was able to quit cold turkey and haven’t felt any cravings since.
Nicotine on the other hand is very much a constant battle that I feel like I could relapse at time, just a wiff of second hand smoke is enough to give me very strong withdrawal jitters. Infact, I feel that a heavy contributer of my weed dependency was a transference of my nicotine addiction.
In that sense, targeting mental health issues through therapy and appropriate prescriptions for co-occurring mental health conditions will likely help kick cannabis dependence.

embrace other forms of therapy and medication that is a better long-term option.

Exactly this. For certain disorders cannabis simply won’t help and potentially lead to psychological dependence.
For certain disorders like chronic pain, I don’t even recommend using THC, instead go for CBD products.

No need to apologize, you’re new; I don’t expect you to know all the Lemmy localized terminology yet.

If you start at 25 or later when you’re brain is fully formed, your IQ won’t take a permanent hint unless you’re a heavy smoker. It will still effect your memory to some degree tho, but that also goes for alcohol and other drugs.
Using in moderation is key.

The term is Lemmings, btw.
Because :

I was playing that old-school game Lemmings, and Lemmy (from Motorhead) had passed away that week, and we held a few polls for names, and I went with that."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemmy_(social_network)#History

Ofc it’s prone to bullshitting, it can’t even stay consistent; shit will contradict itself and sight the same sources.

Yes there is, it’s called the compositor.
In Wayland, the compositor is functionally both a display server and compositor.

Yes, but not on Gnome Wayland and that’s the problem. Their decision to do CSD only on Wayland is a problem for the entire ecosystem.

Server Side Decorations merge when?

Yeah, OP should probably add “Rust-based” or specific Epoch to avoid confusion.

like 5 years or more

They’re really good & extremely dedicated devs with lots of experience working on it, so I think that’s a little bit of an underestimation, I think it’s within the possibly of getting there within 5 years, maybe not exactly 1:1 ofc. However, they’ve really put in a lot of thought into base of the project, and in my experience having a strong well designed base can propell future development forward much faster than initial estimates. Even now, they’ve been smashing mile stones much faster than expected and if they keep their current trajectory at a steady rate I believe it’s possible the meet some level of parody within a 5 year goal. Ofc, anything can happen so only time will tell. Also, considering the fact that they’re not having to deal with the X11 tech debt…

Why do you think trump started peddling Jesus bullshit last time he ran even though he’s not even remotely cristian or religious. He’ll shill anything as long as he thinks it’ll profit him.

The fact people bought NFTs just proves that crypto bros just buy into hype without understanding the technology.
I knew NFTs were bullshit from the start because I actually took the time to understand how they “worked”.

That goes for both…

We’re discussing Apple’s implementation of an OS level AI, it’s entirely relevant.

GrapheneOS has technical merit and is completely open source, infact many of the security improvements to Android/AOSP are from GrapheneOS.

I love Olan’s.

Who?

Yeah and apple is completely untrustworthy like any other corporation, my point exactly. Idk about you, but I’ll stick to what I can verify the security & privacy of for myself, e.g. Ollama, GrapheneOS, Linux, Coreboot, Libreboot/Canoeboot, etc.

However, to process more sophisticated requests, Apple Intelligence needs to be able to enlist help from larger, more complex models in the cloud. For these cloud requests to live up to the security and privacy guarantees that our users expect from our devices, the traditional cloud service security model isn’t a viable starting point. Instead, we need to bring our industry-leading device security model, for the first time ever, to the cloud.

As stated above, Private cloud compute has nothing to do with the OS level AI itself. ರ⁠_⁠ರ That’s in the cloud not on device.

While we’re publishing the binary images of every production PCC build, to further aid research we will periodically also publish a subset of the security-critical PCC source code.

As stated here, it still has the same issue of not being 100% verifiable, they only publish a few code snippets they deam “security-critical”, it doesn’t allow us to verify the handling of user data.

• It’s difficult to provide runtime transparency for AI in the cloud.
  Cloud AI services are opaque: providers do not typically specify details of the software stack they are using to run their services, and those details are often considered proprietary. Even if a cloud AI service relied only on open source software, which is inspectable by security researchers, there is no widely deployed way for a user device (or browser) to confirm that the service it’s connecting to is running an unmodified version of the software that it purports to run, or to detect that the software running on the service has changed.

Adding to what it says here, if the on device AI is compromised in anyway, be it from an attacker or Apple themselves then PCC is rendered irrelevant regardless if PCC were open source or not.

Additionally, I’ll raise the issue that this entire blog is nothing but just that a blog, nothing stated here is legally binding, so any claims of how they handled user data is irrelevant and can easily be dismissed as marketing.

AI powered Rootkit.

Their keynotes are irrelevant, their official privacy policies and legal disclosures take precedence over marketing claims or statements made in keynotes or presentations. Apple’s privacy policy states that the company collects data necessary to provide and improve its products and services. The OS-level AI would fall under this category, allowing Apple to collect data processed by the AI for improving its functionality and models. Apple’s keynotes and marketing materials do not carry legal weight when it comes to their data practices. With the AI system operating at the OS level, it likely has access to a wide range of user data, including text inputs, conversations, and potentially other sensitive information.