dafoex

I agree. While the article is correct that this problem of subtle bias exists, the solution for most cases is to realise that the computer "does what you say, not what you mean".

Not sure what a better term would be... Just being more specific might help, like "bias in the training data"?

While I agree with you, and the article, that the larger problem is that the AI model simply hasn't experienced enough data to get an accurate grasp on the situation, or that the data was labelled in a way that influences the model's understanding, I think the problem here may be a human one. In the article update, the author says that they managed to craft a prompt that got the result they want by specifying the banana must be on its own. The model knows what a banana on its own looks like, but the human is expecting the model to "do what I mean" and getting frustrated when the model "did what I said". Now, I'll admit that I skimmed the last third of the article, but I didn't see any mention that things like Stable Diffusion and Midjourny have a syntax, saying "a single banana casting a shadow on a grey background" is different from "((single banana)), casting shadow, hard light, dramatic, grey background" for example.

Apparently those kinds of people consider you to be the one with the communication disorder. I consider them incapable of writing an abstract.

Facebook is foreign to me, and my country has no first amendment, we only allow their constant spying because we are part of the five eyes and it is beneficial for us to let the yanks do whatever the hell they want to us.

Why are they worried? If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear! Or does that only work when the Americans are spying on everything we say and do both online and off?

This is terrible, but its also karma.

There's an emoji for handgun, but Apple and other big tech decided it needed to be a water gun. There is also a rifle character intended to represent the sport of shooting in a pentathlon, but again Apple threw its weight around and, while the character became codified in Unicode, it never became an emoji and no font from big tech supports it.

I'm glad you've explained it. Maybe I'm being dumb, but I can't see where the article actually says what laws are being violated.

Then make a dedicated fall detector and sell it to the elderly. They already make wrist bands with panic buttons that phone for help, put the sensor in the phone hub just in case they fall and lose consciousness.

I have a few wallets with alleged RFID blocking. For those its mainly to stop arse grabbing attacks where card info (or security badge info) could be cloned with a little badge reader held in someone's palm.

I was thinking the same thing. I've seen Google Voice (audio), Hangouts (text, audio, and video), Allo (text), Duo (video), Meet (video), Chat (text), and Messages (text) all in quick succession. Which one of these do I pick to compete with iMessage, Google?

The most useful NFT I've seen so far is Decentraland's LAND token, which behaves much like a deed to a plot of virtual land. Its something you could theoretically download free gratis, but as LAND is linked to a finite space in a living virtual world, you'll never own it in its entirety by just screenshoting it because your copy is desyncronised from the original.

A photograph, or even a 3D scan of the Eiffel tower does not mean you own it or infringe on the owner's or designer's perceived rights, and likewise a copy of the land isolated from the Decentraland grid does not mean you own the LAND.

Tl;dr, I think NFTs need to focus on being a record or something - anything! Rather than being the new way to buy art, sell the technology as the new way to do deeds, licences, certificates, etc.

didn't list provide a complete and accurate list of his previous jobs

I was always told to only provide relevant and accurate previous jobs (which evidently Firr didn't do, either) and that, ideally, each CV should be tailored specifically to the job you're applying to. Same with qualifications - don't lie, but there's no need to say you did a music GCSE if you're applying for a job at a datacentre.

What, those things you put on horses eyes?

I'd say the problem with touch screens is that they encourage car manufacturers to be dumb at UX (see also: that German who crashed because Tesla thought window wiper controls needed to be in the iPad). When I'm cold on my night time commute home, I want to reach for a knob and turn up the heat, when my music is loud and I'm approaching a roundabout, I want to thumb a rotary encoder and turn it down, when a call is coming in I want to feel a button and push it to answer, same for pausing music or skipping that song I don't like but is still in my playlist for some reason.

All the common tasks that may have an impact on safety while driving need a physical control, and anything else can be relegated to the magic rectangle because I've no need to use them. As it stands I only use Android Auto to tap "Maps>Work" or "Maps>Home" just so I can have the best route through Milton Keynes with it's ever changing traffic.

I generally like car UIs (I'm a fan of glossy things rather than flat things) but no amount of polish will make the layout not suck. Its usually designed for left hand drive cars and clusters common actions near the wheel, but won't change when you're in a right hand drive, causing you to lean across the centre console to use it. Android auto (and I'm hoping Apple's equivalent) mostly handles this amazingly, putting common functions actually close to you.

Its not all good, though. The Skoda Karoq has this split personality thing going on where it comes with its own sat nav, and that tries to take over your experience when you start navigating in Google maps. Its only a (first world) problem when you have the overly fancy glass cockpit, but it likes to replace your speedometer with a full screen map from the internal sat nav, which has none of the information from Google such as your next turn or the blue line showing your route.

Oh, so this law isn't even in force yet? No wonder I'm not aware of it.

I guess Skoda was breaking the law when they made the citigo. That didn't even have radar reversing sensors as standard.

We are but muggles, so I don't think we need to worry about teleporting children appearing in the time it takes you to get back in the car. You know your blind spot is clear and can see where your future blind spot is now.

Who made them mandatory? When and where? You have other blind spots, too, and manufacturers know that relying on a camera makes drivers neglect their other blind spots - Skoda cars even pop up a toast notification saying "Look around, is it safe to move?" to try and discourage lazy drivers thinking the computer is a replacement for a brain.

But all this feels like a moot point, anyway. I understood the main argument to be advocating the use of physical controls, not the removal of safety sensors and cameras.

Laws in what country?

Getting out of the car would save 95 lives, too

Then use your eyes and neck joint to check your blind spots? You'd fail a UK driving test if you relied entirely on your mirror (or camera, for that matter) when reversing.

Oh, and as for why we got it, some scrote put a brick through our porch door and tried to put one through our front window. We hoped if they tried it again we would capture their face, but we all know criminals wear a uniform that hides identifying features.

They aren't even that good. We (unfortunately) have an Amazon doorbell and all it does is play wind chimes constantly as dog walkers go past. On top of that, the one time we had a suspicious person approach our door it didn't even record them, we were left wondering what this guy with a bunch of flowers was doing kneeling down at our lock.

Also I find it hilarious that Amazon deliveries don't even ring the doorbell, they just knock the door, drop the package on the door step, and vanish before you even unlock the door.

Go was based entirely on Google's Daydream efforts. Hell, the Quest 2 still throws very Android ANR errors when a game crashes. Oculus's innovation into cordless and standalone is copied at best and outright plagiarism at worst. On top of this, the hardware itself it heavy on the head because they try to put it all in the visette. Sure, it might be aesthetically pleasing to just have one pair of goggles, but as a user I would much rather have a compute pack on my belt with a beefy heatsink to cool better hardware. If they did this they might even have the option of cordless body tracking in standalone VR before anyone else, but they won't because evidently Oculus still think they are making cardboard boxes.

I would argue that Facebook are not the stewards of the first big VR world, Linden Labs are. Second Life has been a thing for a long time and, while not exactly the decentralised dream of an open metaverse we would want, its a hell of a lot more open and unregulated than whatever Zuckaberg's boffins could cook up in a month for the keynote scripted demo.

Now, I could sing the praises of Second Life (and parallel efforts like Open Simulation) for a long time, but it would be unfair of me not to mention that it is not officially a VR experience. All VR access to "The Grid", as they call it, is done through third party "Viewers" (effectively a web browser for the metaverse) based on the now open source code for the official Linden Viewer. That said, there has been serious efforts made into making a VR Viewer for The Grid, and I expect such efforts will only be enboldened by the new direction Facebook/Meta is taking.

I would agree here. Much of Wave was put into Google Docs, Drive, etc., as well as various other Google office collaboration products. Yes, Wave itself died, but it didn't fail.

Google does this with a lot of their stuff, it seems, too. Google Glass, for example, spread into so much of Android and further: Ok Google for the Assistant came from Ok Glass; the timeline made its way into Google Now and eventually into Assistant again; heck, you can see the beginnings of Material Design in the Glass UI. Google makes a ton of experimental products only to axe them swiftly and put their remains into new products.

I would hazard to bet that most of those people involved in the insurrection only did so because of the number of violent protests that were met with underreaction in the previous year.

Still, america is a nation of extremes, and if something doesn't go their way they're all very quick to jump to "its a conspiracy against us" conclusion. A union bound together by nothing is doomed to fall apart from the slightest push.

I suspect Mastodon is laying on the "big bad Trump" a little thick, here, but yes. I'm on the side of the GPL, not Trump or Mastodon, so all I want is Free Software licences to be respected.