is a pain in the assn

is dependent on 3rd parties

Well, one of the two, at any rate.

vterm for my terminal, all within doom emacs.

Hah, didn’t know about vterm, just term.

investigates

On one hand, vterm appears to support 24-bit color.

On the other hand, eat — another emacs-based terminal emulator — appears to support Sixel.

Definitely hot competition among emacs terminal emulator programs.

$ git clone https://github.com/csdvrx/sixel-testsuite.git
$ cd sixel-testsuite

This is running terminal-only emacs in foot (which supports both Sixel and 24-bit color), with a vterm buffer and an eat buffer:

https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/91b24f67-c2ff-4a52-aa41-6db539472470.png

Though to be fair, Amazon’s scale is very large, so it’s worth it to spend a lot on automation. They’ve done a lot with robots before. 14k isn’t as many as it might sound, at their scale.

kagis

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/21/technology/inside-amazons-plans-to-replace-workers-with-robots.html

Amazon’s U.S. work force has more than tripled since 2018 to almost 1.2 million. But Amazon’s automation team expects the company can avoid hiring more than 160,000 people in the United States it would otherwise need by 2027. That would save about 30 cents on each item that Amazon picks, packs and delivers to customers.

Executives told Amazon’s board last year that they hoped robotic automation would allow the company to continue to avoid adding to its U.S. work force in the coming years, even though they expect to sell twice as many products by 2033. That would translate to more than 600,000 people whom Amazon didn’t need to hire.

Why is so much coverage of “AI” devoted to this belief that we’ve never had automation before (and that management even really wants it)?

I’m going to set aside the question of whether any given company or a given timeframe or a given AI-related technology in particular is effective. I don’t really think that that’s what you’re aiming to address.

If it just comes down to “Why is AI special as a form of automation? Automation isn’t new!”, I think I’d give two reasons:

It’s a generalized form of automation

Automating a lot of farm labor via mechanization of agriculture was a big deal, but it mostly contributed to, well, farming. It didn’t directly result in automating a lot of manufacturing or something like that.

That isn’t to say that we’ve never had technologies that offered efficiency improvements across a wide range of industries. Electric lighting, I think, might be a pretty good example of one. But technologies that do that are not that common.

kagis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity-improving_technologies

This has some examples. Most of those aren’t all that generalized. They do list electric lighting in there. The integrated circuit is in there. Improved transportation. But other things, like mining machines, are not generally applicable to many industries.

So it’s “broad”. Can touch a lot of industries.

It has a lot of potential

If one can go produce increasingly-sophisticated AIs — and let’s assume, for the sake of discussion, that we don’t run into any fundamental limitations — there’s a pathway to, over time, automating darn near everything that humans do today using that technology. Electrical lighting could clearly help productivity, but it clearly could only take things so far.

So it’s “deep”. Can automate a lot within a given industry.

No problem. Yeah, it’s an invaluable off-site resource that new users don’t get informed about. Indexes all of the Threadiverse instances, whereas any given instance can only search the communities that are local or at least one local user has subscribed to.

https://lemmyverse.net/communities?query=networking&order=active_month

The world was full of flat surfaces that did not yet have an Android-platform device driving a screen displaying advertisements on them.

There’s a case that at some point — maybe not today — computer controlled cars should have more-relaxed restrictions on things like speed and following distance, just because they won’t be limited by things like human reaction time and senses.

That Slate Truck thing had the right idea. Make the computer a replaceable thing, not something tied to the lifetime of the car. The lifespan of a smartphone is typically a lot less than the lifespan of a car.

This is a 500W charger with one port that can do 240W.

https://www.amazon.com/UGREEN-Charging-Station-Temperature-Space-Saving/dp/B0DL5L1ZLH

It’s quite large and heavy. 2.2kg (4.9 lbs).

There are going to be some practical limitations on what people are going to be willing to carry for portable stuff.

I’m not familiar with it, but relevant context:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQRL

although I concede that better metrics would be hard to find.

Maybe get ALPRs to start logging bumper stickers. :-)

Aside from a MAGA hat, there is likely no object that feels more emblematic of US president Donald Trump’s return to the White House than the Tesla Cybertruck.

If Musk had been able to attract the typical F-150 owner to the Cybertruck, then the Cybertruck wouldn’t have flopped, and I bet that the F-150 is a whole lot more correlated with voting Trump than the Cybertruck is.

IIRC from past reading, in terms of voting correlation by party, the Toyota Prius is the “most Democratic” vehicle and the Ford F-150 is the “most Republican” vehicle.

kagis

Nope (or at least, not by the metrics chosen here), but I’m close.

https://www.businessinsider.com/car-models-owned-by-republicans-democrats-american-politics-jeep-2024-10

To get a sense of how our rides reflect our political leanings, we compared 1.7 million vehicles listed on CarGurus with the results from the 2020 presidential election. We included only counties that were strongly red or blue — those where either Donald Trump or Joe Biden won by at least 19 percentage points. Then we placed every car on a political spectrum from reddest to bluest.

According to this, which excludes more-politically-mixed counties from the dataset, the vehicle most-correlated with voting Trump in 2020 at a county level is the Jeep Wrangler, followed by the Jeep Gladiator, followed by the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 (which I assume is the Chevy analog of the F-150), followed by the Ford F-150.

The vehicle most-correlated with voting Biden (at a county level) was indeed the Toyota Prius.

EDIT: To be fair, the article author is probably partly talking about Musk’s association with Trump and the Cybertruck coming out about that time, and he’s talking about the 2024 election specifically, but I think that the Cybertruck is maybe high-media-visibility, but doesn’t have all that much to actually do with voting Trump.

Inclusion of Erowid in the training corpus had initially seemed like a good idea.

The prediction comes from OpenAI employee Leopold Aschenbrenner, who claims AI will “reach or exceed human capacity” by 2027.

I suppose that it depends on the metric you’re using. There are some tasks at which humans are outperformed now.

But I am pretty comfortable saying that come January 2027, the great bulk of things that humans do will continue to not be able to be done by existing AI.

We aren’t going to just tweak an existing LLM somewhere slightly, throw a bit more hardware at it, and get general intelligence.

I found that while the lemmy_server process starts successfully and shows “Starting HTTP server at 0.0.0.0:8536” in logs, nothing is actually listening on port 8536.

Does:

# netstat -ntap|grep 8536

…show anything bound to the port?

I’m not sure how you determined that it’s not binding to the port, but that’s how I’d check.

There isn’t much that should stop a process from listening on a port over 1024 unless another process is already listening on it.

I don’t know why you want a BIOS update.

If you’re wanting VT-x support, looks like it’s present.

https://mobilespecs.net/laptop/Toshiba/Toshiba_SATELLITE_M100-221.html

Processor Model: T5600

https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/core-2-duo-t5600.c378

VT-x

https://superuser.com/questions/1584771/what-is-difference-between-vmx-and-vt-x

The CPU flag for VT-x capability is “vmx”; in Linux, this can be checked via /proc/cpuinfo

-the opening the port process makes sense. It seems like if I have a backend on my rig, I’m going to need to open a port to access that backend from a front end of a phone device.

Yes. Or even if you run a Web-accessible front-end on the LLM PC — the Web browser on the phone needs to reach the Web frontend on the PC.

Or possibly even access that same backend on the phone device via a mirror?

Well, the term wouldn’t be a mirror. In your shoes, it’s not what I would do, because introducing some third host not on your network to the equation is another thing to break. But, okay, hypothetically, I guess that doing that would be an option. thinks. There might be some service out there that permits two devices to connect to each other, though I’m not personally aware of one. And, say you got a virtual private server for $10 a month or whatever the going rate is, yeah, that could be set up to do this – you could use it as an intermediate host, do SSH tunneling from both the PC and the phone of the sort that another user in this thread mentioned. I guess that that’d let you reach the PC from other places, if that’s something that you want to do, though it’s not the only way to accomplish that. But…I think that that’s most-likely going to add more complexity. The only scenario where that would truly be necessary is if the wireless access point — which I assume your ISP has provided — absolutely does not permit the LLM PC and the phone to communicate at all on the WiFi network, which I think is very unlikely, and even then, I’d probably just get a second wireless access point in that scenario, put the PC and the phone on it.

In general, I don’t think that trying to connect the two machines on your home network via a machine out on the Internet somewhere is a great idea. More moving parts, more things to break, and if you lose Internet connectivity, you lose the ability to have them talk to each other.

-it seems like it would be easier if I could connect to the rig via an android phone instead of an iPhone. My end goal is to use Linux but I’m not ready for that step. Seems like android would be an adequate stepping stone to move to, especially if we have to go thru all this trouble with iPhone. Shall we try on the android instead? If not I’ll follow the directions you put above and report back on Saturday.

If you have an Android phone available, that would probably be easier from my standpoint, because I can replicate the environment; I have an Android phone available here. But it’s not really the phone where setup is the issue. Like, it’s going to be the LLM PC and potentially wireless access point that require any configuration changes to make ollama reachable from the phone; the phone doesn’t need anything other than Reins installed and having an endpoint set or just using a Web browser and using the correct URL there. I’m just mostly-interested in that the phone has to be able to talk to the PC, has to be able to open a TCP connection to the PC, and so having diagnostic tools on a phone is helpful. I don’t have to guess how the diagnostic tools work in Termux on an Android, because I can use them myself locally.

I wouldn’t suggest going out and buying an Android phone to do just that, though. I mean…this is a one-off diagnostic task, just trying to understand why the phone isn’t able to reach the LLM PC. If you can open a connection from the Android phone to the LLM PC, then you should also be able to open a connection from the iOS phone to the LLM PC. If you do have one already available, though, then yeah, my preference would be if you could install Termux on it for the diagnostic tools rather than install iSH on the iOS device. It should still be possible to get the LLM PC reachable on the iOS device either way.

I don’t mind trying to diagnose connectivity on the iOS device. Just keep in mind that I may have to guess a bit as to what the behavior is, because I can’t actually try the device here, so we may potentially have a few extra rounds of back-and-forth.

If you do want to use an Android phone, then just put the phone on the WiFi network, install Termux, open Termux, run the apk command to install telnet (apk install telnet) and then try the telnet command I mentioned and just report back what error, if anything, you get when trying to open a connection to the LLM PC — hopefully it’ll be one of the above three outcomes.

I choose Ollama because it was supposed to be one of the easier loca AIs to set up.

Well, the ollama bit is up, which is why you can use it on the PC. The problem is network connectivity between the Windows PC and the phone.

Opening a port between two things on the local network is going to be pretty much the same for anything. Some software packages — I dunno about LLM chat stuff — make use of a third, outside system as a point to coordinate, so that software only has to open outbound TCP connections to the Internet. But for local communication, it’s gonna look pretty similar. If you put koboldcpp or llama.cpp or whatever on your machine, you need the same connectivity, though it might default to using a different port number.

I’m happy to keep banging away if you’re also willing, though. I mean, this does kinda narrow it down. If you don’t want to do so though, remove that firewall rule that we added earlier from the Windows PC. If you do:

considers

The next step is seeing where the break in connectivity is.

I’m not familiar with iOS, but let me see if there’s a software package for it that will let it open a TCP connection and preferably ping (and ideally show the ARP cache to see whether Ethernet packets are getting from the phone to the Windows machine at all, though that may not be viable).

Basically, would be nice to see whether packets can currently get from the phone to the PC and back.

kagis

Looks like Windows Firewall blocks ICMP by default, which is traditionally used by ping, the simple protocol to see if one host can reach another on the network. Mmmmf.

And it sounds like ARP isn’t available on a non-jailbroken iPhone, which would be the simplest way to see whether a packet is making it from the iPhone to the PC. I was worried would be the case.

Hmm. This is a little less convenient in that I don’t have tools that I normally would when trying to troubleshoot network problems on a Linux system.

thinks

I guess the simplest thing available, cuts things down as far as possible in terms of connectivity between the two that should be able to reach from the iPhone to the PC should be a TCP connection.

I don’t know the iOS software library well, but lemme search for a telnet client. I’m sure that it’ll have one; every platform does.

searches

Oh, this is even better. It looks like there’s some iOS app, “iSH”, with a tiny Alpine Linux environment for iOS, kinda like Termux on Android. That’ll have telnet and probably other network diagnostic tools, and those I am familiar with, so I don’t have to guess from screenshots how things work. You should be able to try to open a TCP connection from the phone to the PC with the Linux telnet client in that.

goes looking around

Okay. If you’re willing to give this a shot, it sounds like the way this works is:

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ish-shell/id1436902243

Install that from the iOS store.

When opened, it should show a Linux terminal. If it works like Termux, it’ll have basically nothing from Alpine Linux installed, no telnet client, just a few simple commands. You’ll be looking at a prompt that probably looks something like iPhone:~#.

Then if you run (don’t type the pound sign — it’s just a convention to include it, to show that it’s something to type at a prompt):

# apk install telnet

That should install the Linux telnet client inside the iSH app using the Alpine Linux package manager.

Then to try to open a TCP connection from the phone to the Windows PC, you want the private IP of the Windows PC, the thing you see in ipconfig (which I’ll type as 10.1.1.2 here, but replace with yours):

# telnet 10.1.1.2 11434

That’ll try to open a TCP connection from the phone to port 11434 on the PC.

Now, what would happen if everything were working correctly, is that the phone would send an ARP request saying “what is the MAC address — the Ethernet address — of the machine with IP address 10.1.1.2 on the local network?” The wireless access point would hand this to the PC. The PC would respond. The phone would then send a series of packets to that IP address to open a TCP connection on port 11434.

My guess is that you’ll see one of several things at this point.

First, it might be that the wireless access point is refusing to let packets from the phone reach the PC at all — they only let the phone talk to the Internet, not to the PC. Some wireless access points can be configured to do this or have a “guest” wireless network that impose this constraint. Then the phone won’t get an ARP response, since the PC will never see the ARP query. That’ll look like this (using a network I’m on at the moment to demonstrate):

$ telnet 192.168.1.35
Trying 192.168.1.35...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: No route to host
$

Second, it might fail because I dicked up in some way and Windows Firewall is still blocking the phone from connecting to the PC. The ARP request is going out, the response comes back from the PC, the phone tries to open a TCP connection to the IP address on the host with the specified MAC address, and never gets a response. If that’s the case, it’ll probably look like this:

$ telnet 192.168.1.126 7500
Trying 192.168.1.126...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection timed out
$

If that’s what you get, the problem is likely the Windows Firewall configuration (well or theoretically the wireless access point could be configured to do that, but I doubt it).

Third, it might succeed. That’ll look like this:

$ telnet 192.168.1.126 6000
Trying 192.168.1.126...
Connected to 192.168.1.126.
Escape character is '^]'.

If you see that, you can open a TCP connection from the phone to the PC, and whatever issue you’re hitting with Reins isn’t a network problem. Maybe I gave the endpoint syntax wrong, for example. But the issue will be at the application level, not the network level.

There are 3 lines with the :11434 in them. No brackets or anything like that. -1 has 0.0.0.0 in front -2 has 10.#.#.# in front and has a foreign address that is something other than 0.0.0 -3 is like the 2nd but a slightly different foreign address

Okay, that…should be okay. As long as all of the addresses that it’s listening on are IPv4 — of the format “x.x.x.x”. No colons in them (other than the colon preceeding “11434”). Not IPv6.

The subnet mask is 255.255.255.0

Okay, gotcha. In that case, go ahead with the instructions above, just instead of “/8”, do “/24”. So:

For “local IP addresses”, you want “These IP Addresses”, and enter 10.0.0.0/24. That’ll be every IPv4 address on your Windows LLM that has “10” as its first number and the first following two numbers the same as yours.

For “remote IP addresses”, you want “These IP Addresses”, and enter 10.0.0.0/24. Same thing all addresses that start with a “10.” followed by the same following two numbers, which should include your iOS device.

Oh yes. I’m on windows 10 as well.

Okay. I think that the interface to add the firewall rule there looks the same as the one I Iinked to above. I went searching for screenshots of adding a hole for a port on Windows 10, and the control panel looks identical to me.

So, yeah, should be good to go ahead with the above instructions, just using “/24” instead of “/8” in the two places where I mention “/8”. Hopefully after that it’ll be working; if not, then we’ll need to troubleshoot.