If you can’t reject, they either don’t need the pop-up, or they’re not in compliance with the law. Either way it’s in no way the fault of the lawmakers.
If you can’t reject, they either don’t need the pop-up, or they’re not in compliance with the law. Either way it’s in no way the fault of the lawmakers.
It’s not just a warning, it’s also an option to reject.
It’s an interesting question! From my point of view, “devaluing human effort” (from an artistic perspective) doesn’t really matter - humans will still be creating new and interesting art. I’m solely concerned about the shift in economic power/leverage, as this is what materially affects artists.
This means that if your robot creates paintings with an output rate comparable to a human artist, I don’t really see anything wrong with it. The issue arises once you’re surpassing the limits of the individual, as this is where the power starts to shift.
As an aside, I’m still incredibly fascinated by the capabilities and development of current AI systems. We’ve created almost universal approximators that exhibit complex behavior which was pretty much unthinkable 15-20 years ago (in the sense that it was expected to take much longer to achieve current results). Sadly, like any other invention, this incredible technology is being abused by capitalists and populists for profit and gain at the expense of everyone else.
There’s a simple argument: when a human studies Van Gogh and develops their own style based on it, it’s only a single person with very limited output (they can only paint so much in a single day).
With AI you can train a model on Van Gogh and similar paintings, and infinitely replicate this knowledge. The output is almost unlimited.
This means that the skills of every single human artist are suddenly worth less, and the possessions of the rich are suddenly worth more. Wealth concentration is poison for a society, especially when we are still reliant on jobs for survival.
AI is problematic as long as it shifts power and wealth away from workers.
Yet for some reason, browsers started supporting other formats like WebP, even though even fewer consumers wanted them. This makes complete sense when looking at it from the perspective “the companies try to save money and increase market share without caring about the consumer”. How do you explain it from yours?
Because, even though I use dark mode system-wide, I sometimes want to use websites in light mode. Until browsers implement a per-site toggle for the preferred color scheme, websites should offer one instead.
So freedom of speech doesn’t exist anywhere? Literally every place has some restrictions.
Awesome, thank you!
Thank you for the validation, sometimes I feel like I’m going crazy with how often these things are repeated.
But those lectures do sound interesting - would you mind linking them when you have the time?
I don’t understand the tendency to attribute harmful behaviours of the rich and powerful to these strange, irrational reasons. No, UK leaders didn’t spend millions upon millions on propaganda because they have a fragile identity. They did it because they’ll make money off of it, and will be able to move the legislation towards their own goals.
It’s the same when people say Putin invaded Ukraine because he wants to restore the glory of the Soviet Union. No, he doesn’t care about any of that, he cares about staying in power and becoming more powerful. One of the best ways to do so is to invade other countries, as long as you don’t lose.
It depends. I really liked Mozillas initiative for local translation - much better for data privacy than remote services. But conversational/generative AI, no thank you.
No way they have CD set up. The interns are raw-dogging that shit through FTP, like in the good old days
You are 100% sure that there is no mention of Wikipedia being integrated into Firefox/Chrome in any page? How thoroughly have you checked?
Where do you see it working? I see the result:
There were no results matching the query.
The extension mentioned in the post is supposed to:
return the relevant quote and inference for the user, along with links to article and quality signals
I don’t see any relevant quotes, or links to articles, or quality signals.
I tried with your comment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?go=Go&ns0=1&search=I+can+currently+right-click+and+then+click+"Search+on+Wikipedia"+in+the+context+menu.++I+believe+this+works+in+both+FF+and+chromium+browsers.
Why doesn’t this work? If your complaint were valid, this should work.
I don’t think there’s a way to make it work for both cases.
It’s actually important that the rail gives in and deforms, as this reduces a cars energy much more quickly and safely than if it were rigid. Unfortunately this also makes them much less effective for larger vehicles.
In the end, it’s a question of protecting as many people as well as possible.
Actual, true AI
It’s a trend-hopping company. Always 1-2 years behind actually valuable topics, but on the forefront on any useless bullshit you can think of.
Ex-IBMer here too. I only heard the motto twice - once when Ginni visited our location, and once when local departments were closed.
Coincidentally there was never any money for me to work on interesting ideas…
I love it. Finally, I remember what these pictures felt like before I knew they were bullshit. It’s a certain mysticism that was missing.