If there’s ever a Giraffe Interchange Format, I’ll pronounce it the same as giraffe. And unlike some people, I’ll be able to tell the two apart.
If there’s ever a Giraffe Interchange Format, I’ll pronounce it the same as giraffe. And unlike some people, I’ll be able to tell the two apart.
Stuck a wire in a power outlet.
Direct democracy—except instead of directly voting on legislation, voters vote on the desired effects of legislation and a metric for measuring if those effects are being achieved. The actual legislation is then written by specialists trained on effective policy implementation, who can adjust the legislation on the fly if it isn’t having the desired effect. Their mandate is limited by the associated metric—if they can’t meet the goals, they lose their mandate and the case goes back to voters for review.
At least Oracle Weblogic is being useful for someone.
It’s like eleven Floridas crammed into the space of Michigan.
Yeah, “generating your own Marvel movie” was considered high art for most human cultures before copyright: from traditional epics to Greek dramas and even Shakespeare’s “serious” plays, audiences were already familiar with the characters and stories and valued the art of the re-telling. Novels (so-called because the characters and stories were “new”) were considered low-brow trash for people unfamiliar with the myths and stories that “real” literature was based on.
Now, that primal human urge to build on and re-tell familiar stories is relegated to unlicensed fan-fiction and to franchises like Marvel who only permit certain sanctioned creators to build on their “property”.
Trademarks should be good as long as the company is in business.
Patents should be determined by weighing two factors: 1) how much sooner will the invention be produced than it would have been without the incentive of a patent, and how much will the public benefit from that earlier introduction; and 2) how much will the public be harmed by the monopoly resulting from the patent? The patent should then expire before the second factor outweighs the first.
Copyrights have been a scam since they were first introduced: the original intention (when printing was first introduced) was to police the printing of politically or morally objectionable works, but the authority appointed to do so abused the power to sell monopolies on printing specific works. Authors were originally opposed to this practice, and actually got it overturned for a time—the idea that copyrights are needed so publishers can compensate authors was a post-hoc justification publishers came up with to get authors to withdraw their objections. But it’s never been a good deal for the actual creators.
So copyright needs to be re-thought from the ground up—the amount of time that works remain under copyright is a secondary issue.
I have little hope that Biden, Harris, or (obviously) Trump will actually change course on the US’s Israel/Palestine policy—but to be fair, we shouldn’t expect the current vice president to openly say she would reverse the current president’s foreign policies even if she intended to.
“The boat suffered a series of indescribable, unreasonable errors, the impossible happened on that boat … but it went down because it took on water.” […] The CEO ruled out any design or construction errors, which he called unlikely after 16 years of trouble-free navigation.
This sounds like an out-take from the “front fell off” skit.
That varies by subreddit, which might actually help in training LLMs to recognize the difference.
That will remove your account from public view, but will it remove it from the data they use for AI training?
If not, you’re just enhancing the value of their proprietary data.
At some point someone’s going to train an LLM on material from successful scams to autonomously generate new scams, then wire the money to server farms to run more copies of itself.
The people responsible for developing Windows should never be allowed near any kind of critical infrastructure.
But how will we automate our trolley problems?
deleted by creator
Would that make it a type of sapphire?
Weakness and risk are distinct things, though—and while security-through-obscurity is dubious, “strength-through-obscurity” is outright false.
Conflating the two implies that software weaknesses are caused by attackers instead of just exploited by them, and suggests they can be addressed by restricting the external environment rather than by better software audits.
Interpreting “a previously-unrecognized weakness in X was just found” as “X just got weaker” is dangerously bad tech writing.
For software that’s currently available on both Windows and MacOS, how does the performance of the Windows version under Wine compare to the MacOS version under Darling?
For the Greek gods, the greatest sin was attempting to be like them.