It’s expensive being poor

LLMs keep getting better at imitating humans thus for those who don’t know how the technology works, it’ll seem just like it thinks for itself.

Like that time they made a giant hole in the screen and called it ‘dynamic island’ 😂

It’s the iBump, it’s a haptic invention gently letting you know you have passed to the other half of the screen. They also made it visible to give you a gentle cue as to where the middle is.

Idk, he popularized electric cars, it has to count for something. But yes, net loss.

It’s unusable without ads, so if you watch a lot of YouTube it’s worth to pay.

What do you mean that the search engines contain minimal amount of site’s data? Obviously it needs to index all contents to make it searchable. If you search for keywords within an article, you can find the article, therefore all of it needs to be indexed.

Indexing is nothing more than “presenting data to the algorithm” so it’d be against the law to index a site under your proposed legislation.

Wrong. The infringement is in obtaining the data and presenting it to the AI model during the training process. It makes no difference that the original work is not retained in the model’s weights afterwards.

This is an interesting take, I’d be inclined to agree, but you’re still facing the problem of how to distinguish training AI from indexing for search purposes. I’m afraid you can’t have it both ways.

I’d be careful with the “always” part. There was a famous case involving Katy Perry where a single chord was sued over as copyright infringement. The case was thrown out on appeal, but I do not doubt that some pretty wild cases have been upheld as copyright violations (see “patent troll”).

Are you really trying to argue against a point by providing evidence supporting it?

What do you think “ingesting” means if not learning?

Bear in mind that training AI does not involve copying content into its database, so copyright is not an issue. AI is simply predicting the next token /word based on statistics.

You can train AI in a book and it will give you information from the book - information is not copyrightable. You can read a book a talk about its contents on TV - not illegal if you’re a human, should it be illegal if you’re a machine?

There may be moral issues on training on someone’s hard gathered knowledge, but there is no legislature against it. Reading books and using that knowledge to provide information is legal. If you try to outlaw Automating this process by computers, there will be side effects such as search engines will no longer be able to index data.

My point was, the same applies to petrol car. They all have infotainment and need spare parts.

Why wouldn’t they? You plug it in and keep driving. It’s not any different from petrol cars.

To be honest I prefer to use a power bank, it’s more convenient than having to swap batteries (i used to do that too) as you don’t have to power down the device. And one power bank can power many different devices, so i don’t have to buy a new one when i Change phones, and can use the same power bank to charge my earbuds, kindle, smartphone, and a variety of other devices, or lend it to someone.

Having said that, i did have my Nexus 6P battery degrade and had to be RMAd, lucky for me it was within warranty. Battery is the fastest failing component so being replaceable will go a long way in prolonging devices lifetime, but doesn’t have to be user-replaceable.

Active suspension is software, just like Photoshop is. You need to pay subscription fee for Photoshop now, and BMW wants a subscription fee for their active suspension software too. Rent seeking and Enshittification.

I dont know, they had a large chin with the huge home button for the longest time, a waste of space. They now have the dynamic island, which also takes up space no matter how they dress it up. I prefer the punch hole, like the one on Pixel 5 which was out of the way.

Pixel A series is still a reasonably priced good phone with a great camera, no?

And make the crowd bigger. Good plan 👌

Good, I’m happy for iOS users. They always wait patiently for the features and they often come in a polished form.

Specifically only ios users are locked down in the Walled Garden. Android users can switch manufacturers at will since they all have Google play - except to Apple of course.

Most apps nowadays are subscription based anyway.

Developers already pay a subscription fee.

Apple is just being greedy and tries to disincentivise developers from using third party stores. They are not incurring any cost associated with those downloads.

I mean once files are deleted maliciously or accidentally