You are correct. AI can give an a completely different answer than its source and they can just blame it on AI. This is true but Google has sway the results given depending on the individual. Obama talks about this and how it contributes to the extreme divide of people of the US.
It steals content from creators while being worse for the environment at the same time. Not the same thing, it is worse.
I worked in education in computer science and basic usage in nearly every age group. When you realize how bad people are at using search engines, you can see why people think they accomplished something using AI. It's like giving a child a calculator saying he can do math now.
Creating search prompts itself is a skill. You wouldn't think so until trying to teach some one logic through search prompts. It is hell, literally my hell. Some people just don't get it like 0 percent.
Differentiating what is a good source and what is a bad source is an even harder skill. People will believe what they want to believe. Google search adapts to the bias of individuals because it keeps people searching. This is why, even though it isn't perfect, engines like duckduckgo are important.
I commented a user's use of "rare". Then you did the same to my comment.
I didn't think how the initial poster use of the word "rare" meant to describe "a matter of popular practice, not difficulty." So I replied back to you.
Minimum wage in Spain is €1,300 per month. A Pixel 9a is under $500 and under €550 and currently on sale for $449 and €500. A couple of hundred can get you a Pixel 9. What exactly is a not obscenely price for a flagship phone to you?
And I don't even understand your second comment. People spend over an hour a day on social media alone.
So the normal person in Spain could buy this phone and the normal person in Spain does have the time to figure out how to install a "rare" operating system. A "rare" operating system that's free and easily copied.
Interestingly, since the data is read twice, some unlicensed developers exploited that. They would have logo data for something other than Nintendo in the location the logo data was normally stored. So you could boot the Gameboy and see some other logo besides the Nintendo one. But, when the logo data was read again for validation, they would quickly change the logo data to the Nintendo logo. That way, the Nintendo logo was never technically reproduced on screen, yet the Gameboy would still boot. Even more genius if you ask me! Very few unlicensed games were released for the Gameboy (at least here in the states). Here’s the best list I could find of unlicensed games.
I appreciate you took the time to correct me on this. I appreciate the information.
As for me saying copyright infringement, I thought it would've be trademark infringement since it is a trademarked logo but the blog post said copyright and they seem to have done their research so I went with that. I figured maybe the code itself for the Game Boy hardware and rom was copyrighted.
Here something I always thought was interesting about Nintendo and copyrights.
The Nintendo logo for the original Game Boy (the one that scrolls down) was a way to prevent unlicensed developers from releasing games on the Game Boy.
Games would not boot up if the Nintendo logo is not read on the cartridge and the ROM.
So for a developer to release a game on the Game Boy without Nintendo knowing, they would have to commit copyright infringement.
The Game Boy was released in 1989, over 36 years ago. They used this same tactic on the Switch. They claim the prod keys, which are needed for Switch emulators, are copyrighted.
Because people don't want to pay for shit content. Let's take pirating out of the equation. If I read a book I borrowed and I really like it, I would buy. If the content was trash then I wouldn't. Same goes if I watch a movie, listen to an album, or eat a microwavable burrito at a friend's or family member's house.
Only District of Columbia (90.28% to 6.47%), Maryland (62.62% to 34.08%), Massachusetts (61.22% to 36.02%), Hawaii (60.59% to 37.48%), and Vermont (63.83% to 32.32%) did better percentage wise.
California is still in the top 5 of the most Democratic states, even beating out New York (55.91% to 43.31%), Washington State (57.23% to 39.01%), and Illinois (54.37% to 43.47%).
If you look at the percentages, a lot of people voted for Trump everywhere. You can't just single out California for this.
I tried Thumb-Key. Learning curve was really high. I instead went with Unexpected Keyboard, also no predictive text. I really enjoy using Unexpected Keyboard and I don't have to through a bunch of sub keyboards to look for a symbol. I rarely go to a different sub keyboard.
Do you type faster with Thumb-Key than a normal keyboard like GBoard? In your opinion, is it worth learning?
They have the code built in to their keyboard and their messaging app just in case you switch keyboards.
It would be easier looking in to their own internal company files or databases than to parse information from a website even if they are really good at that.
You are correct. AI can give an a completely different answer than its source and they can just blame it on AI. This is true but Google has sway the results given depending on the individual. Obama talks about this and how it contributes to the extreme divide of people of the US.