That feeling when you finally get the timelock safe open and have to do certificate work that shatters YouTube’s connection to the account personalization systems.
They blanket banned any AI stuff that's not pre-approved. If I go to chatgpt.com it asks me if I'm sure. I wish they had not banned Claude unfortunately when they were evaluating LLMs I wasn't using Claude yet so I couldnt pipe up. I only use ChatGPT free tier and to ask things that I can't find on Google because Google made their search engine terrible over the years.
The post auto plays videos as you scroll and sets them to full screen on mobile. It also seems to hijack all scrolling and stutters constantly on scroll.
Now I want to see one where you let any login work but dump them at a fake shell that logs the commands sent. I’m curious what they do. Could even crowd source a mapping of command string matches to example output.
I don’t have access to the article, so I’m basing this response solely on your comment. I wonder if the author thinks all animations on the web are called GIFs. So being part of creating one of the early methods of publishing animations on the web (Shockwave) confused the author.
And I can see how maybe the author of the post this entire thread is about could see this and just roll with it.
For the record the link I post seems to be entirely and completely wrong, and if I had such a post written so factually wrong about me, all while trying to take credit where none was owed, would be so embarrassing.
But we live in a strange new world where we can just fabricate anything we want and back fill websites and probably pollute AI with nonsense just to push political agenda and gain favor in the masses who ether are ignorant or don’t care to ever know the truth.
It's interesting to poke around and see how the game of telephone works.
The first mentions I saw on Twitter were from February 2018[0]. Subsequent Black History Months[1] would reiterate how she invented GIFs or sometimes animated GIFs. You even get crazy things like how she invented the animated GIF while working with the Obama administration[2]. (That post references an article that talks about her working with the Obama administration that doesn't mention GIFs[3]. The author just merged the two things she's credited with.)
In 2024, the story is that she invented the GIF at Netscape[4], which obviously makes little sense. It could be a reference to GIFs looping, but I see no evidence for that, especially since her LinkedIn[5] doesn't say she worked at Netscape. She worked at Macromedia, which involved work with Netscape, and I suspect the genesis is her work on Shockwave during that time (2005-2010), and that was taken to be a precursor to animated GIFs (obviously false, but an easy mistake for someone young and non-technical. Maybe it's a cultural precursor to modern animated GIF usage in people's minds?)
Overall, though, this is a pretty dumb thing for them to claim, even if the claim is widespread across the Internet these days. She was roughly 17 when animated GIFs were first developed.
As I said, it's interesting to see how the game of telephone plays out. I don't think anyone involved in this was intentionally spreading false information, and I don't really expect random Twitter users to fact-check carefully. I would like NYT to put some effort into it. As it is, we now have a NYT touting an obviously-false claim when she actually did a lot of really important and impressive stuff they could focus on instead. There's no need to spread fake accolades for her. Her actual contributions stand on their own.
Addendum: In the paragraph after merging Shockwave and GIFs, NYT references a Forbes interview[0] where she specifically says she didn't invent GIFs.
NYT:
> Ms. Gelobter was the director of program management at Macromedia where she helped develop Shockwave into a web plug-in that allowed for video games and animation on the web, turning still images into moving GIFs — animated images known as a graphics interchange format.
Interview linked in the very next paragraph:
> Gelobter: I want to clarify that I did not create GIFs although I get credited for it a lot. I think people conflated thinking about animation on the web as being animated GIFs but that was Shockwave. Again, what we did with Shockwave was transformative.
Legitimate criticism is about specific actions or behaviors. You could even say that you are opposed to certain laws, like the right of return.
Saying that a nation should just not exist, regardless of how they behave or what laws they have betrays a deeper irrational hatred. Especially if there’s only one state that must not exist, while there are many countries with laws you would disagree with.
Are you against the existence of South Africa? Or were you against the existence of some laws in South Africa?
It also isn’t racist to be against the existence of states in general and believe in a world without borders. But to say that Ukraine has a right to exist, Ireland has a right to exist, Palestine has a right to exist, Greenland has a right to exist - only Israel does not have a right to exist is antisemitic.
I am against the existence of apartheid South Africa, just as I'm against the existence of apartheid Israel.
No state should discriminate against people based on their religion. (And absolutely no state has a right to exist. People have rights, not governments.)
Chase: one thing that’s always stuck with me was when you talked about when you realized that you “can both do good and do well”.
reply