If you're really a traditionalist you'll hide a bag of glitter and 3 sticks of dynamite in their food. Then you just wait until they have to use the bathroom upon which they'll be in for some explosive fun. Just a harmless little prank the founding fathers used to have a laugh with one another.
I use that all the time. I have so many friends who just give it however long it says on the packaging and then complain their microwaves suck.
The only thing that can still throw me off course is when the packaging says: "microwave for about 7-9 minutes depending on your microwave". Bro, what am I supposed to do with this information? I'm ready to go watt for watt, I don't want to keep an eye on my microwave. I just wanna hear the bing and know it's done.
Minimalist design really went from "maybe 38 different clickable links isn't the most optimal way to get around this site, we should probably optimize how we use screen space" to "WE MUST GET RID OF USEFUL FEATURES SO WE CAN DISPLAY 5-8 MORE PIXELS OF WHITESPACE" in the span of a decade lol
He said "because of ballooning development costs". Stardew valley is famously a one man labor of love, the opposite of ballooning development costs.
$14 pr sold copy is ridiculously high in this context, because development costs is only for one dude.
You're comparing this guys runaway success with a company with several development teams, office spaces, marketing teams, accountants, probably janitors, security, etc, etc.
I'm not saying he is in the right, just pointing out that it is apples to oranges.
Europe uses cl, ml and dl. A can of coca Cola is 33 ml, a shot is 2 cl. Then you switch to litres at 0.5l.
We also use decilitre, but only in cooking, and I think most don't think of it as 0.1 l, but rather just think of it as the size of a measuring cup, i.e. it has more in common with "1 cup of sugar" than with "0.5 liter of water" in terms of how you think about it. More abstract, if that makes sense.
When your favorite band cancels their gig because the lead singer has "come down with the flu", that's industry code for "got too wasted, and is currently too busy getting alcohol and possibly drugs out of their system to perform".
I even worked one show that had to end after 20 minutes because one guy in the band was visibly under the influence, refused to play, talked to his hallucinations, then spent a few minutes talking to the audience about how his foot was evil and wanted to kill him, before the tour manager could drag him off stage. Then he tried to assault several backstage staff for not allowing him to cut off his foot. This was on a tour that promoted alcohol free rockshows btw, so we didn't provide alcohol to the artists backstage. God knows what he might've purchased from our local street dealers lol.
The next day in the papers, the headline says "[the band] cancels first week of reunion tour after flu outbreak" 🙃 Yes, of course
That's not fair. I care about security a lot. But implementing security takes time, and hiring me for more hours costs more money. So most entities that need software developed want the solution that costs less and is faster to develop, they don't really understand what "security" even means. And the reality is, if you really want security in your software, you're not hiring a dev to make a piece of software, it is a continuous expense to keep the software patched and secured, which is not what most companies want. I'm billing for the hours either way. You just need to point me to the guy who's willing to pay.
And I also don't know anyone who feels incentivized to fix security holes. It's the software equivalent of having to fix the leaky mystery toilet in a dive bar. Yes, the pay might be high, but it's also extremely stressful and you're taking on a lot more responsibility - because it's already too late. Plus it puts a strain on the relationship with the customer who paid you to develop the software, even though we both know they were the ones who didn't want to pay to prevent this in the first place. If you think I'd rather stay on high alert 24 hrs a day thursday-monday to fix some preventable shit, than be at home with my family on the weekend, you're insane. The bonus might make it tolerable. I'd still rather not.
Yes I am aware of that. However, I'm not sure how this has anything to do with the fact that it is also illegal to steal data, then continue to use said data to make profits after having been found out. The two are not connected in any logical way, which makes it hard for me to continue to address your concerns in a way that makes sense.
The way I see it, you're either completely missing what we're talking about, or you have some misunderstanding of what the AI language models actually are, and what they can do.
For the record, I'm in no way disagreeing with your views, or your statements that legal and ethical don't always overlap. It is clear to me that you are open minded and well-intended, which I appreciate, and I hope you don't take this the wrong way.
You seem to think the majority of LGBT+ positive material is somehow illegal to obtain. That is not the case. You can feed it as much LGBT+ positive material as you like, as long as you have legally obtained it. What you can't do is train it on LGBT+ positive material that you've stolen from its original authors. Does that make more sense?
No, especially because it's not the same thing at all. You're talking about the output, we're talking about the input.
The training data was illegally obtained. That's all that matters here. They can train it on fart jokes or Trump propaganda, it doesn't really matter, as long as the Trump propaganda in question was legally obtained by whoever trained the model.
Whether we should then allow chatbots to generate harmful content, and how we will regulate that by limiting acceptable training data, is a much more complex issue that can be discussed separately. To address your specific example, it would make the most sense that the chatbot is guided towards a viewpoint that aligns with its intended userbase. This just means that certain chatbots might be more or less willing to discuss certain topics. In the same way that an AI for children probably shouldn't be able to discuss certain topics, a chatbot that's made for use in highly religious area, where homosexuality is very taboo, would most likely not be willing to discuss gay marriage at all, rather than being made intentionally homophobic.
I know what you're thinking. Did he fire six shots or only five? Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost track myself. But being that this is a .44 magnum handgun, you've got to ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya ... Punk?
For anyone who hasn't seen it, or just hasn't heard the full version.
The most interesting thing to me is not that people quote "do you feel lucky... Punk?" Because if you see it not as a direct quote, but as more of a condensed version, that references the movie, and accurately captures the signature "...punk?"
I think it's more interesting that people have seemingly turned the quote around, because a lot of people then add the "well, do ya?" At the end. So it's either "do you feel lucky... Punk? Well, do ya?" Which just doesn't sound right to me. At least when it's "do ya feel lucky? Well do ya... Punk?" It captures the essence still lol.
If there's something illegal in your dish, you throw it out. It's not a question. I don't care that you spent a lot of time and money on it. "I spent a lot of time preparing the circumstances leading to this crime" is not an excuse, neither is "if I have to face consequences for committing this crime, I might lose money".
If you're really a traditionalist you'll hide a bag of glitter and 3 sticks of dynamite in their food. Then you just wait until they have to use the bathroom upon which they'll be in for some explosive fun. Just a harmless little prank the founding fathers used to have a laugh with one another.