pnt12

It only applies to big companies for now, and it's not rocket science - stores already had to deal with unsold inventory.

I helped a charity that distributed misc items to families who needed them, and I remembered seeing lots of brand new t-shirts from a big supermarket chain. Guess they were already doing it 10 years ago, either due to local regulation or as a tax write-off.

First I was intrigues by the rationalist movement, but I was deeply disappointed. To put it bluntly, seems to me like geeks LARPing as philosophers, and not with rational argument as they promise, but rationalizing their sci fi fanfictions.

It seems especially bad now. This relativistic mindset is really bad for critical thought: "oh, it was never 100% fair". Well, if it was 80% earlier, it seems approaching 20% now. It's a whole new level.

FromSoftware really puts design first, so it doesn't surprise me they use a classic AI and then leave it up to the designers to craft memorable experiences.

This was published in 2018, vut I believe some things have worsened in the last years for the west. Some examples are: Housing crysis, wars, rise of the alt right, loneless epidemic, betting, scrolling addiction.

The article shows a really good point: statements must be accountable on their own, and cannot rely on "further research". This makes complete sense: at what point can I libel someone, and then dodge consequences with "if you do your research, you can get the facts"?

Another point from the article: they are not just aggregating content, but generating it. If you generate falsehoods, that are not even stated by your sources, of course you're responsible.

This can have significant impact to AI in Germany and the rest of Europe, but it's good to question it and hold people accountable.

Indexes have rules for entry, so people using them supposedly agree with them. On the other hand, they were talking about opening exceptions for these companies, which was not part of the initial rules.

Both can be true:

It may not be worthy to question Oracle and Larry motives - it's money, at the cost of anything else (although his pro Israel stance may unveil some other ideology too).

But it's worthy to say they should be held accountable for the scrap they do. Unless we grow so cynical to think the system is deeply rotten and cannot be changed - which is a valid feeling to have given all ongoing events, but there's also some glimmers of hope here and there that are gaining traction.

Fuck the TOS.

When I purchase stuff, I don't wanna read a legal contract. No one wants, no one does.

The contrariam in me thinks: If the contract is that crucial, let's have a mandatory, non skippable, slow scrolling of it, or maybe audio version slowly read.

I bet all TOS would get much simpler and tame!

Also, in my country, more hospitalizations would be quite severe, as the hospitals are already short staffed. There were also not enough masks for everyone to mitigate it.

I think a lot of anti-lock down claims are too simplistic. There were too many unknowns, and there's little consensus about the ideal outcomes.

(I'm a bit biased: I was able to do remote work and move to my parents house, which is quite spacious and near the woods, so I could go outside a bit - so it didn't affect my finances or mental health too much)

But also "we don't know"! = "it's NOT a big deal".

I'm OK with some caution.

New statue in London. Banksy, maybe.

Similar to most entertainment: you have the right to consume, but not the right to adapt into your works and distribute them.

Even consumption is usually limited to private usage: in my country, a consumer subscription is not enough to broadcast in a cafe or even a waiting room.

They're going with Scaleway, a French company. Seems like the owner is a billionaire with a few businesses, but neither La Redoute nor Intermarché!

https://www.scaleway.com/en/news/scaleway-accelerates-its-eu...

I mean, it would also be an option to fix the deficient public health of USA. For all the stupid manipulative stuff Altman says, the system precedes him, no?

And as a cherry on the cake: making a bet a few hours before so they can profit (even more) from it.

We're seeing high bets the day before, such that the bet goes through without too many people noticing and adjusting. Maybe forbidding bets X days before deadline would help to reduce chance of insider trading?

Or just shut down the whole thing. Bets on bombing is truly immoral and downright despicable.

I'm not an American but unfortunately I don't share the optimism. Your president shows time and time again he does what he wants, whether it's immoral or illegal or not within his power to do. And a majority turn a blind eye, especially his party. Some examples (correct me if I'm wrong): starting 2 wars; very questionable anti deportation methods by ICE; a DOGE that was ruthless and dumb; renaming a branch (ministry of war) in effect while in theory not having such power; pardoning crypto currencies pundits who have business with him; ties to pump and dump scams. Not to mention ties to Eppstein.

My prediction: in a vendetta, because they chose to contradict him publicly, and his cronies will put high pressure to have anthropic out of everything touching the government, and any rebel will be fired for an unrelated cause. The high profile CEOs (those we were attending his inauguration) will avoid anthropic, lest they find their selves out of some profitable contract or in some unrelated tribunal issue. Anyone in his party will surely avoid them too.

"Save the children", or "if you oppose this you're ugly".

See you soon folks!

You are not your job

Fully agreed.

You're beginning to feel less-than-useful.

Nope, not at all. Or maybe I do feel a bit useless against the AI slop and FOMO that gets pushed around. But the field is still gonna need engineers to do the non-slop work, or to fix it when it goes wrong.

(I use AI daily BTW.)

As someone said: AI will take our jobs when the execs are able to state their requirements precisely. We're safe!

Just because two things are "annoying", doesn't mean they have the same ethical problems.

The fun single player games only need to convince you they are a fun experience and you should buy them once.

Games with loot boxes are trying to convince you every day to spend money on them. Dunno about roblox, but often the items are visible, and "defaults" are often perceived as poor or noobs.

We can't be naive: It's a whole other level and companies are spending millions on manipulating kids to spending more and more money.

Counter-argument: we're talking about saving a handful of bucks for something that lasts months. Do it if you find it fun - I tried it and didn't like the work nor spice under my fingernails, at all.

My preferences in cooking are like software: high level is fun (cooking dishes), low level is annoying (growing or producing ingredients).

I also like making cocktails. A brief try with homemade coffee licqueurs was disappointing - knowing a couple of good brands, I can buy and enjoy them, no hassle. Closest to preparing ingredients I do is occasionally doing batches of "super juice", where you squeeze a bunch of limes and add some conservatives and enhancers (and water), that increase the yield, flavor and shelf life by a lot. Then it's really practical to just use the juice like a normal ingredient, versus having the cytrus available having to squeeze them and having more stuff to clean.

It's much harder to predict exactly than to dismiss anything slightly off.

But the tendency is showing: in my country, we're getting records in extreme temperatures, forrest fires and storms.

But a study 1% can be dismissed, some random in a basement 99% off can be believed. This just says: many people are just looking for a confirmation of their beliefs, not evidence. And many companies play this game (supporting the right politicians, spreading disinformation aka lies, etc), because there are billions at stake.

This is a tactic I'm seeing more in politics. When it's in the interests of a group for something to pass, but they don't want the blame, they can abstain or defer. It still goes through and if it goes wrong they can argue it's not their fault. Win/win for them.

This has strong vibes of "we investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing".

IDF has constantly rejected their war crimes in Gaza, while independent reporting (from different sources) has found multiple evidence of them.

The thesis could get an F at law school, but it is not guaranteed that the government will act lawfully. Its useful to think about what the administration can do, legal or not, especially when given little challenge when acting illegally.

I'm not American, but I get free shipping on most products, as long as the order has a minimum cost and I wait a couple of days more?

This is true for other sellers too.

This reads like propaganda. Amazon has no business de-listing products because of their price elsewhere.

If it wanted to be pro-consumer, I don't know, it could warn the consumer the price is lower somewhere else, and point them there, like a good search engine of products! Sounds ridiculous? Yeah, because those claims are a bit ridiculous too.

If we censor the names, it reads like a fascist regime from a "shithole" country.