

Check down on data security ;)
Why, a hexvex of course!
Check down on data security ;)
So, I looked at age verification - it was made clear photos were on device only and never transmitted.
If this turns out to be false, then the legal fallout would be apocalyptic.
(Edit: or not, see the comment by ambitiousprocess below)
I was thinking that, you’d think they’d strike once the pot is a little larger.
This was kind of breach so predictable even surprisedpikachu.txt isn’t enough, but it must be done.
⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⣶⣶ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣀⣀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠁⠀⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⠿⠿⠻⠿⠿⠟⠿⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⢰⣹⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣭⣷⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠤⠄⠀⠀⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢾⣿⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⡠⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠠⣿⣿⣷⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢄⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿
Didn’t know he had a degree in mathematics - that’s a fun one to share with my students.
Thanks!
“Statistical fact” - as someone forced to teach statistics, whenever a student writes this phrase they lose marks. Any statistical statement is an implication of evidence, not a statement of fact.
How dare you! You can’t throw facts at puritanical arguments; that’s illegal.
Just allow companies to charge a small fee to process a DMCA takedown, and establish a daily compensation rate based on view counts for the uploader (cost payable by the company issuing the takedown - not the entity they represent). Suddenly you only issue a takedown for clear infringement, with the cost paid by the uploader only when clear proof is given that it is a DMCA infringement. If there is a long delay, the uploader gets more compensation, whereas the uploader is only liable for the initial takedown fee.
Not overly much - society has “dysfunctioned” along perfectly well for millennia. It will continue to be dysfunctional for many more millennia.
Better to enjoy your life and spite that dysfunction than to live under its heel.
Yep, that’s just how it is these days. Let me ask though, does it really matter?
If the girls are afraid of the guys, that’s their problem, not yours. Stick the time into something else you enjoy, let nature run it’s course. Find a job you don’t hate, spend your money as you like, live a happy life without the anxiety of rejection.
Different strokes for different folks - windows 11 does have it’s uses.
Ever since our office laptops “upgraded” they’ve made excellent space heaters during the winter. Open up Teams, a PowerPoint, and a YouTube video and you’ve got a nice toasty office!
Windows 11 the plumber:
I come round, and I’ve brought a few friends who start rifling through your photos and desk; I state I can fix your toilet, but only if you agree to always use me to fix your toilet, and pay £120 a year even if your toilet never needs fixing.
Meanwhile, I change your aircon settings, sign you up to a new expensive energy supplier, cancel your streaming subscriptions and sign you up to mine. Oh, and I give my weird mate a copy of your house key so he can photograph you and your loved ones daily.
But don’t worry, the toilet is fixed. Every 6 months or so I’ll come back to your house and break a random appliance, just so you feel I’m value for money.
Oh no, someone might not be paying them for their user generated content (!)
To be fair, it’s probably best that history forgets this period of the web…
Good to know, I’ll go ask one if the profs in our school of built environment for more info. See if they can offer more insight there.
Definitely a good point to raise; thanks for doing so!
Here’s a fun one - where do you stand on those forced to commute dur to housing prices near inner city work (e.g. I live in near poverty paying a mortgage for a small place near where I work due to poor public transport so I can walk to work - how does this figure into the anti-car vision? Is it an employer issue, a government issue, a personal sacrifice, or something else entirely?)
I dunno, the use of AI Ethicist fits as they’re not against the concept of generative AI as a whole, they’re against unethical generative AI (in terms of stolen training data and environmental harm).
If the world transitioned to a post-IP (intellectual property) society (as we need to), with AI eating less power, then AI Ethicists are unlikely to object.
Would you happen to be a vegan who is also anti-car by any chance?
If so, I can recommend fuckcars on ml as they share your viewpoint.
I applaud folks like this - they make a choice and stick with it. No “I’ll never use AI to generate art but I vibe code to save time” hypocrisy. No “I use it to help me with maths, but I’d never use it to steal artistic work”.
Just straight up “it is an environmental hazard, it is unethical, not engaging”. Should be called “AI Ethicists” rather than “AI Vegans”.
*so that the government can say kids won’t watch porn.
Rule 1 of computers that everyone who has taught an ICT class learns - if little Timmy wants titties, he finds a way.
Neat summary and cleanup - editing original post to point at this.