infecto

10 ms·

241.
by infecto 3mo ago
They never said they would afaik. They were considering it and went through a consultation process and the outcome was a no.
242.
by infecto 3mo ago
Considering yes but unclear how much of that is doing valid DD or a real push internally to want inclusion.
243.
by infecto 3mo ago
Defend your position instead of comparing to earthquakes. The Nasdaq 100 is already quirky in that it’s the largest 100 non-financial companies listed on Nasdaq. So it’s a large-cap growth/tech play or for Nasdaq a showcase piece. I do
244.
by infecto 3mo ago
Is this really the worst thing? People keep bringing this up but it’s the Nasdaq 100. It would be shocking if we were talking about the SP500.
245.
by infecto 3mo ago
Does it say how many cameras the LAPD pays for or if they are getting rid of the flock software from their org? Folks conflate this a lot but often times most regions have a substantial number of private flock deployments, city owned, rarel
246.
by infecto 3mo ago
Agree, which is why these discussions need to happen. I am a big proponent of this kind of tech but also welcome the discussion to figure out appropriate boundaries.
247.
by infecto 3mo ago
These drones are “piloted” but it can be in a semiautonomous way. Your argument makes sense for Flock cameras but not for this style of drone. I think first response with a drone to an active call is a great use of resources for all parties
248.
by infecto 3mo ago
Agree I wish the article focused more on the storage and availability of the data instead of the narrative they wrote. It’s in there but not the focus which imo is the issue. I think it’s great to have the drones as active response but like
249.
by infecto 3mo ago
Maybe similar trajectory but fundamentally Chatrie is about compelling stored data from a third party. I don’t believe there is any meaningful overlap between that and direct visual observation from police. Folks should argue it in court if
250.
by infecto 3mo ago
Yup I did and it was not clear. I think those two examples are worthy of a discussion on scope creep but not clear policy violations atm. The intent is to be used on active calls which I believe is a great idea. A clear violation would be t
251.
by infecto 3mo ago
Did you read the article… These are being used for active calls only. Can you describe how this breaks the 4th? Does it really matter if it’s a human tracking down a suspect or a drone. If you have any case law that shows general cameras br
252.
by infecto 3mo ago
And very easy to ignore. Not an easy solve. Once the cat is out of the bag you cannot put it back. Similar to how LLMs have massive training sets on copyright material.
253.
by infecto 3mo ago
So these are only being used on active calls. As I have said else where there is a line to draw on active calls and data mining. Having an eye on the sky for an active calls is a pretty nice use of resources and serves all parties. I am a b
254.
by infecto 3mo ago
I think I agree. I think this is the type of data that should be able to be requested (and given if the context is correct) but not simply freely out there. Some third party commercial party will just use and abuse it.
255.
by infecto 3mo ago
+1. I think having cameras is good. In this case these are active calls and it’s great for all parties. How it’s used after the fact is what matters imo. I could even get comfortable with tech like Flock if it was not so ripe for abuse.
256.
by infecto 3mo ago
I think there is a valid discussion for devices like Flock. The CEO is a detriment to their company and the lack of police guardrails and auditing make it ripe for abuse. Having a camera in the sky for police calls does not sound like a bad
257.
by infecto 3mo ago
What liberty does a drone with a camera break? Seems like a nice optimization on police resources.
258.
by infecto 3mo ago
I don’t think I have a problem with drones. There is a line to be drawn regarding auditing access of footage and how we are analyzing it historically (prevent from misusing the tech) but for things like active reporting it has the potential
259.
by infecto 4mo ago
Sorry I still could not understand your point about Adobe. Instead of getting defensive and attempting to deflect “what’s unreal?” in the context of unreal engine you should try to defend your position. Edit: NM you are a new account. Shado
260.
by infecto 4mo ago
Classic now the “what are you upset about”. Sorry not upset here just love to push back on ridiculous people. Businesses are free to operate however they choose. There are other options in the market outside of unreal ( though they definit
261.
by infecto 4mo ago
Sorry I don’t know what you are trying to say?
262.
by infecto 4mo ago
If that’s all you have to respond then you sir are the one with no argument. I have listed my points multiple times. All you keep saying is “they could offer it at a fixed price”. Well that price would be well above any hobbyist. It is kind
263.
by infecto 4mo ago
I know you’re trolling but come on. The entry price for what you are suggesting would never be obtainable for folks like this kid. You can absolutely negotiate pricing if you are a big enough studio but for hobbyist they let you use it for
264.
by infecto 4mo ago
If they sold it as a one time purchase this kid would have never been able to use Unreal.
265.
by infecto 4mo ago
There is this high correlation with low quality comments and smiley faces, that and when people like to insult others and put a little winky face at the end. You are simply making up nonsense. It is not a lot of work as most likely sales ar
266.
by infecto 4mo ago
Inversely I am building things I either never would have gotten to and a rate that would have taken infinitely longer. I get excited every day because instead of so much of my day spent writing the boiler plate I can spend most of the time
267.
by infecto 4mo ago
What is this insane argument. Now you are telling me it’s a burden of paperwork because reporting your revenue gets complicated?
268.
by infecto 4mo ago
But it is free up to $1mm in revenue. Anyone can go and download the engine and use it as much as they want free. It is really smart and honestly $1mm is a generous entry point to capture a royalty for everyone involved.
269.
by infecto 4mo ago
Should unreal give away their work for free? What is your argument. They don’t take a single royalty until $1mm and 5% is not a wild number considering it’s making use of the engine. Heck steam takes 30% which is much more egregious but fac
270.
by infecto 4mo ago
It’s a service that provides an AI bookkeeper so it’s a pretty relevant metric.

More ›