FriendOfDeSoto

When potatoes came over from the New World, a lot of Europeans grew them as decorative plants. New shit makes people do weird stuff.

Not everybody is trying to make a business with so-called AI. The peddlers are just the loudest.

The companies promise their models can do all this stuff for paying customers. If the models were truly that capable, the so-called AI companies ought to be doing everything with them and be raking in the dough like mad. Which they’re not because they know the limitations of the models. It’s what economists call the bullshit gap between marketing and reality. And by economists I mean me.

The devil is in the details. You have to define homelessness first. Would a ban on that even be legal? And what is the state doing to prevent it and/or what are the penalties for violators? There is certainly a chance that this inches painfully close to keeping people concentrated, in a camp, which should, in a sane world, weigh heavily against such a ban. But if a ban meant anybody on the street gets put in an apartment, given medical care including therapy, and then given a chance to become a productive member of society within their means, then it wouldn’t be imprisonment. That’s the Finnish solution to the problem, which benefits from having a smaller population in the country overall and a smaller percentage of homeless people than, say, Los Angeles.

Fools! That’s exactly what was missing from creating Skynet! The workers were replaced with slop bots, now management gets replaced by slop bots too! It’s slop bots all the way down! Run for the hills!

It seems to me like you are coming to grips with the fact that statistics are nice but one mustn’t trust those one hasn’t forged personally.

I imagine there may be political or even practical reasons why they draw the line there. A lot of times lines remain fixed because they made more sense when they were drawn ages ago and now it’s just a pain in the butt to change them. Or to keep numbers comparable with those from previous years.

A memory wipe would make sense. Or they go back in time, say, to punch some more dinosaurs, come back, and there is just Bob at her station and nobody bats an eye because the timeline was changed. A reverse Sela (the RomYarLin from TNG) move. Because I’d like both of these solutions, I’m very positive they’ll find a far less satisfying one.

I think you could save this one still. People knew his name before he was elected leader because he was imprisoned by his racist government. That’s not really a good thing.

Aung San Suu Kyi, for a short time while in power before she tolerated genocide on her watch, would have sort of fit in the Mandela category as well.

Strange New Worlds is en exercise of writers writing themselves into exceedingly narrow corners if in the end they want to connect to TOS. They had a descendant of Khan on the crew, half the crew dated her, yet none of that comes up when they meet the actual Khan. I wonder how they will connect that story point.

During the wedding episode, nobody sees Trelane as Trelane. They see other people he inhabits. In the daily soap ep, only Pike sees him, and he isn’t around later. So they kind of got that right, I think.

The first coherent space opera was Babylon 5 where one creative mind oversaw everything and in the end wrote all the scripts. The reboot Galactica is another example. You could tell The Expanse was all made up by these two guys. I’m sure I’m forgetting something, a Stargate possibly. But Trek and also Doctor Who all change with their changing writers and over the decades. There are periods where certain people are in charge and there is stability in story and focus. But then their tenure ends and somebody else comes in. And if it all made sense and everybody loved it the same way we’d have nothing to bitch about.

Eight minutes can seem very long though.

The “I find it fucking disgusting, bro!” fraction probably isn’t here. Or if they are, they are probably smart enough not to walk into this wood chipper.

There is a strong correlation between shame people feel for having tried it before or for not being able to admit to themselves that they feel this way and then how loud they get. Pair that with religiosity or just a very conservative environment and upbringing and you get the aforementioned bros. It’s more about how they feel, how insecure they are, than about anything physically off-putting. And as somebody who once reacted poorly to being hit on by a lovely Aussie, I think it’s also the somewhat unexpected element of it. We are pattern recognisers. Heterosexual is the majority. We can easily get freaked out by something that’s different. And a lot of the LGBTQ+ folks are still not living their romance in public (if there is some and they also want to) because they avoid wood chippers society has an unfortunately abundant supply of for them.

I’m an alien. I’m a legal alien.

I remember the day when the training wheels came off my bike and it was glorious. The feeling of success you can only feel as a child when you have mastered something you think you should do. They didn’t come off because they were no longer cool. They were never cool to begin with. And you didn’t have much say in the matter anyway.

I am willing to believe that balance bikes to proper bikes is a better learning experience, according to the boffins. That doesn’t mean though that anybody who learned on training wheels is inferior. People who learned to ride a bike like that also won the Tour de France.

I think if I was caught like this, the last thing I’d want to do is talk to the media about it. Not even under a pseudonym. But this story is probably not here to make Google feel bad and return some of the money. This is a reminder for parents everywhere to review payment and parental settings on anything their kids use online. You can be smug enough to say my 8yo doesn’t stream on Twitch or whatever because why tf would you let them anyway. But you’re deleting the credit card off of Google Play because you forgot it was there because parenting makes you forgetful at times.

My opinion as another cis dude: there are three things at play. (1) What is the definition of “feminism?” If you believe that women and men and everybody in between and beyond are equally worthy members of society and should not be discriminated against in any way, then you fit my definition and can call yourself a feminist. (2) I recognize that this is a hot button issue for some people unfortunately. I also see that other people may operate under a different definition. I give shit to anybody with opinions on the matter that go against (1). I don’t necessarily use the word “feminist” in that context because some words - good words! - have a way of closing people off like an oyster. “Woke” and “feminism” are two examples. Worthy concepts behind both in my view but the mere mention makes some people stop listening. Especially those who would benefit from widening their horizons. Humans are capable of rational thought but we don’t always do or behave that way. I’m dogmatic in my opinion but I’m not dogmatic in the language that I use so I try and adjust it to fit the situation. (3) Even among supposed allies you’ll find oddballs. You don’t want to be a self-professed feminist who mansplains feminism, just as an example.

In this mixed minefield, I think I want to be judged more by my actions than the terms I use.

The premise seems to suggest that the target companies’ security measures remain locked in at current levels. So while the attacker models scheme and plan and infiltrate, they do not notice or they do nothing. I don’t think that would be realistic.

I also don’t think the targeted companies don’t already feed all their data into some models. There will be beaches and poorly configured LLMs - the prize won’t be as juicy, the impact of the grand conspiracy won’t be as big.

I think the sky will not fall here.

They are a bit vague on this but I suspect all of these attack vectors start with LEOs having physical access to the unlocked phone. They then set up a trusted desktop without the phone owners knowing.

Which is clever, to be fair. Whether or not that’s legal is already a court case. The law is so frightfully grey.

The other ones I mentioned.

That’s ucked fup.

China’s biggest denomination is CNY 100 or about USD 15. India pulled its largest denomination bill from circulation maybe 5 years ago. The US stopped doing anything above USD 100 a while ago. Bigger denominations are a counterfeit and bribery risk.

Nobody cares about the Swiss Franc in cash outside of Switzerland. There are 10 million or thereabouts Swiss people. All the other currencies are used in much larger populations, three-figure millions at the lower end.

but would an EU-style freedom of movement remove that by allowing citizens of both Canada and US cross freely…?

Captain Obvious says yes.

It should be noted that not all that glitters is gold. At various times, Schengen member countries have reinstated border checks. Not at every border crossing but randomly checking people. Often unfortunately in accordance with the Family Guy police stop meme Pantone skin color chart. Germany is doing it at great cost as an internal political maneuver. Italy is doing it to people coming from Spain post the run on Ceuta. At the height of the Syrian refugee crisis every EU country along the way did it. Free movement is the first victim of anti-immigration politics everywhere. There is an argument to be made that this lofty ideal inked on paper in the 90s was too lofty for its own good in a realpolitik kind of way.

Given the current US administration and the crap they’re pulling on their friendly neighbours to the north there is no way this will happen. This century, if I had to put a time frame on it. This is what happens when the toddlers run diplomacy. Earning respect takes ages, losing it takes no time at all.

I may be white, sensitive, and full of bullshit. But I’m not American!