Khanzarate @ Khanzarate @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

420

Joined

2 yr. ago

Right. If he had, he'd have been screwed by the hospital later, which is why he didn't.

It is.

If he accepted it, he'd no longer have an argument with a strong foundation. He could still sue, but a lawyer could argue they already made it right.

Exactly the same logic as a 1$ inheritance, it shows that this was dealt with, so the law doesnt have to deal with it again.

That'd be a possibility, yeah. Just a possibility, but very interesting nonetheless.

Estimates vary but seem to be between 5 and 10 cents per brick.

Lego definitely makes a profit, but they also haven't done the usual thing for a business to do, make the product cheaper to squeeze more out of it. In fact, one of the reasons to choose lego over another is the tight tolerances they have for their Legos, they fit better and hold better than a knockoff.

So like, yeah, business, they're trying to make money, but its not the clear-cut fake inflation thing going on, or even necessarily price gouging, as far as I could determine. Its more, this is what a quality product costs, they haven't cheaped out, but it just feels so prohibitively expensive because people aren't paid enough in general.

Well they remembered the plot of Frankenstein and boldly applied it to reality to become afraid of a new thing.

I mean a black box would just mean that no one can see it as it processes. Put things in, get things out. As long as their claims are true, this will certainly do that. Same as an onboard AI that we still don't understand.

They're basically saying they won't ship off data to be processed to anyone else. Apple server hardware will process it in data centers.

There's then a further promise that this hardware will be isolated from other things apple is doing, so that no other apple processes not related to AI will be able to see this data.

So, for instance, some other AI company might cut a deal with Amazon, get a discount on AWS processing, and in exchange, let amazon snoop through the data being processed. Or, a company might use a cheaper process in an existing data center that isnt particularly secure, and just not care if its being spied on. I'm sure there's more likely scenarios as well, I'm not a security expert, but apple is promising to thwart any similar thing, by promising the "cloud" for AI is a unique cloud, not just encrypted or whatever, but actually physically separate from everything else

Its the equivalent of saying "this product won't trigger your peanut allergy, we've built a facility that will never see a peanut, so cleaning procedures are easy and accidental contamination is impossible since this product is the only thing made in this factory."

These are still just claims though, not facts, so we'll see.

Interesting.

The paper indicates the forms are specifically limited, in mice there were 15 specific forms they could take.

But still, they evolve between the forms, so yeah, they are equally alive as a digital thermometer. Now they just need to get their act together to beat a tamagotchi.

Nah they're a single molecule. While they do have a mechanism to "reproduce", they cannot react to stimuli of any kind, or evolve. Of the 7 commonly accepted traits of life, viruses have 5-6 depending on where you stand with them not being able to reproduce on their own. (In comparison, while a tapeworm or other parasite might need a host, they bring their reproductive equipment with them).

Prions have 1 of those traits. They can't regulate an internal environment as they cannot have one, they lack any kind of organizational trait, they have no metabolism (the other one viruses lack), they do not grow, they don't adapt to their environment, and they do not respond to stimuli.

A digital thermometer has organization and responds to stimuli, so it's more alive than a prion.

3.0

2.0 was windows 8.

I bet it won't be weird at all, honestly.

Growing pains, obviously, that'd be weird, but once they're in, you'd get used to them as easily as you got used to having them removed.

At least, I had mine for a number of years before they were removed. It seems surprising, but I'm used to not having them, and I think the inverse will be equally weird.

I'm not dumb nowwww though. I want them back.

Dentist didn't even let me keep them. I was gonna cast them in resin and make bone dice out of my mistake. Unfortunately, human teeth aren't big enough to make dice without some extra material.

I had my wisdom teeth removed because I failed to take care of them (dumb teenager), but my dentist told me my jaw fit them just fine, so I never had to lose them.

I want them back.

Well hey I appreciate it, I genuinely thought what i wrote was the whole thing, I'm glad to know that there's more, and the details behind it.

It is though. It's the mixing thing.

You can order a steak rare at a restaurant, no worries. They won't serve you a hamburger that hasn't reached temperature. There's only one real difference; your steak has a miniscule chance the cow it came from was sick, while that hamburger has the bacteria of every cow that went into the meat grinder.

As per the other comments, we have thousands of cows per bottle of milk. 1000x the risk that someone drinking raw milk from their family farm has.

While obviously bullshit now, there's mild forms of vision issues. I have astigmatism, and if it was caused by an issue, I'd be able to honestly say "yes the issue affects my vision, but no, this didn't impact my ability to see the guy do it." A cataract could block peripheral vision while not preventing someone from recognizing someone they looked at directly, etc.

This guy's a liar, but it's still plausible. If a thing should've been done differently besides the fraud, it'd be to require an eye test for the court specifically

So I have been unable to quickly confirm this on the post office directly, but the commonly cited rule online is quoted as 917.243(b).

If we can believe the multiple sources and the rule hasn't been changed, I recalled it a little incorrectly. Using such a letter as a label is legal but if they deem it an improper usage, like directly mailing a brick with the letter taped to it, they reserve the right to just dispose of it. No trouble for the sender though, so it can't hurt.

Well that's not the argument you were making. He's regrettably met the minimum standards for it to go to a proper court, though.

I don't think it's heavy-handed to think an incident can have multiple parties responsible. It's very possibly that. I think a jury should determine if Baldwin legally should've done better, using evidence and witness testimony about what would normally happen.

Personally I think it's much more the armorer's fault. I agree with you. But I wasn't there, I don't know that we have all the information, or even that the information I've learned is completely accurate. A trial is the way to get all the information and certify it as true under penalty of perjury. Then the people who have been given every fact from both sides can make that determination.

It's not legal anymore but that doesn't mean you'll get caught

In a sense, yes.

Usually they phrase it like "sharing in their most intimate moments" but without consent that's just an innocuous way of saying exactly your first reaction.

In some ways, its related to loneliness, filling a need they haven't filled other ways.