tempfile

24 ms·

391.
by tempfile 2y ago
The other option you don't mention is "algorithms can solve it, but they do something different to what humans do". That's what happened with Go and Chess, for example. I agree with you that people don't consider in
392.
by tempfile 2y ago
The OP is talking about (land) enclosure, not stealing exactly, and enclosure is a precondition of capitalism. To be fair, it's a precondition of feudalism as well. But in order to turn resources that are essentially held in common (li
393.
by tempfile 2y ago
What are you talking about? You said: > Capitalism is about moving wealth more efficiently: easier to allocate money/wealth to X through the banking system than to move sheep/wealth to X's farm. It's not. That's
394.
by tempfile 2y ago
no, the original comment was correct
395.
by tempfile 2y ago
capitalism and "money as an abstract concept" are unrelated.
396.
by tempfile 2y ago
It's not legal, but it's also not theft.
397.
by tempfile 2y ago
> you have to make useful proxy measures what to read and what not yes, obviously. But AI slop makes those proxy measures significantly more complicated. Critical thinking is not magic - it is still a guess, and people are obviously wors
398.
by tempfile 2y ago
> I already questioned the information before and continue to do so. You might question new information, but you certainly do not actually verify it. So all you can hope to do is sense-checking - if something doesn't sound plausible
399.
by tempfile 2y ago
The point is to distinguish between an act that is immoral in and of itself and one that is immoral because we aren't sufficiently smart/honorable/efficient. This informs the argument - in the latter case killing could be per
400.
by tempfile 2y ago
No. Murder is not the same as killing, just like not all taking is stealing. Even the most civilised society imaginable admits that killing is sometimes acceptable (in self defense, for example). Killing done by the state is trivially not m
401.
by tempfile 2y ago
Thanks for posting this, the quoted text smelled like something pulled out of... the air.
402.
by tempfile 2y ago
It is certainly not processing under your control. You don't do anything with the data - none of your computers are involved, you never see or read or copy anyone's data whatsoever. The data subject is processing their own dat
403.
by tempfile 2y ago
> the person reviewing the message might not even know what the app is! Sorry, you have gone too far here. If the reviewer doesn't know what the app is, they aren't reviewing the app at all. Knowing that a photography app takes
404.
by tempfile 2y ago
Are you? If the user processes their own data on their own device using your software, you're the data processor?
405.
by tempfile 2y ago
> That is a terrible reason to request camera access. Oh come off it. It's used to take photographs because it's a photography application. How much handholding do we need?
406.
by tempfile 2y ago
This is how it should be, but it isn't how it is. The system packages are generally very outdated, and don't support multiple versions on a single system (which makes dependency locking a fantasy). I dream of the day where we only
407.
by tempfile 2y ago
Why limit it to commercial works? I was originally optimistic this would help with e.g. deepfake attacks. Unfortunately it seems like it is mere protectionism.
408.
by tempfile 2y ago
The term "abuse" in this description is both confused and confusing. Websites are trying to meter out a public resource, which is something they're unable to do by themselves. Cloudflare is offering to help them, for a fee. O
409.
by tempfile 2y ago
Are you sure that you actually transfer 3PB/year? I think if you were maxing out your retail line, AT&T would give you a call.
410.
by tempfile 2y ago
I think it is just asking for the gossip around the ban. It doesn't read as "the ban was justified" or not.
411.
by tempfile 2y ago
It's not readily apparent, it's just FUD to lay the ground for the tories to come back. They're all the same, after all :-)
412.
by tempfile 2y ago
The article you link to explains that the Three Day Week led to the collapse of the Conservative gov in 74, and while Thatcher became leader, she did not come into power until 79. If the power outages led to anything, it was to a Labour gov
413.
by tempfile 2y ago
he really never misses
414.
by tempfile 2y ago
0.1% of the US is 300k (and less than 100% of people have considered writing a book).
415.
by tempfile 2y ago
Neither grow nor shrink on average - it's quite possible for a noisy system to be stable.
416.
by tempfile 2y ago
Why does it write like it's having a stroke?
417.
by tempfile 2y ago
> Implying the problem is not how much they were paid but rather the quality of the work. Aren't those identical? If you do a bad job, we could have got the same bad job from someone else, who we could have paid less...
418.
by tempfile 2y ago
Apparently that is not what the study concluded, they only found that everyone (rich and poor) underestimated the carbon footprint of the rich. Anyway, I still can't find this surprising. It's just obviously a complicated question
419.
by tempfile 2y ago
To communicate what fact? That some random people on the street can't guesstimate carbon footprints very well?
420.
by tempfile 2y ago
Yes, that is my point (although the other reply is correct - the diets of the rich are generally more carbon-intensive).

More ›