There is already plenty enough competition in driving people for money that it's hanging right there on the It's-not-worth-doing-this line.

Competition drives down costs, but only asymptotically to the cost of production. Double the competition, you get maybe a few cents lower prices, if it's already close to the cost of production.

But you know what doesn't move asymptotically? Incentive to cheat. As this news story illustrates: When you live on the margin, when everyone is barely getting by, those who cheat even a little will have a tremendous advantage. It's the same reason there's so much doping in Tour de France: all the legitimate ways of getting even a tiny edge on your competition have already been exhausted. And the cost of policing, of keeping people honest, quickly eclipses the tiny savings from getting ever so slightly closer to the asymptote.

So your auction scheme would make things worse, I guarantee it. I don't know exactly what way they would find to cheat, but they'd find one. If not they wouldn't be driving for long.

If glibertarians got their way on such things, you'd certainly get cheap taxis, but the only way taxi drivers could make a living was by occasionally selling one of their passengers to the Mafia's kidney harvesting operation.

You can't define "understand" in a non-circular way. Should not a Slashdot poster understand that we, too, can be seen as executing algorithms - and that whatever hard constrains about what algorithms can and cannot do, also apply 100% to us?

Repeating it won't make it true.

AI models need more data because they're more general learners than humans. They have less built-in priors about what they should be doing, they could potentially learn all sorts of patterns that humans can't, so naturally it takes more data to constrain them to one particular pattern.

We make them more powerful by making them less general. Making them worse at fitting all the patterns we won't need, is a fine price to pay for making them better at the patterns we do need (In fact, it's basically the only way we get better models - that's the NFL theorem for statistical learning).

The ability of a few poisoned pixels ability to throw them off, is also due to their overeagerness to learn complicated exceptions to the rules. As models get less general and more powerful, today's deceptive tricks will get less useful - but also, probably new ones will appear.

It's all fun and games until the models learn to poison biological neural networks in the same way. You thought you were simply looking at nice pictures of someone's gardening project, then five minutes later suddenly you decide to run out into the street with no pants for no discernible reason.

According to

Lisa Grossman, a spokesperson for Restore Homeowner Autonomy and Rights (RHOAR), a local group that opposed the law.

But why the hell would anyone believe that and report it as the truth?

Anyone who knows the first thing about Airbnb knows that hosts have a lot of problems with bad guests, and guests have a lot of problem with bad hosts, and that Airbnb spends a lot of effort and money to avoid these problems (and to avoid PR fallout when they fail to).

Ask yourself, how much would YOU pay for a black market Airbnb? And how would YOU trust a tenant in your home if you couldn't legally admit they were there?

There's a much simpler explanation, and that's that we're dealing with real estate owners who scream bloody murder because their passive income stream was taken away.

Good public transportation is always empty in Chicago, and it is always a city bus clogging up streets for my Uber.

Public transportation, even if on time, takes 150-300% longer than a car.

It keeps people poor by allowing them to live 90 minutes each way from work instead of making their bosses have to pay them better to afford to live closer.

"By all news", yes.

Yet, shoplifting may not actually be any worse than it used to, and certainly doesn't make a dent in retail profits.

Who owns "all news" again?

Internet 'may be just a passing fad as millions give up on it', Daily Mail, Tuesday December 5. 2000.

Can't think of anything happening in the last three months... the months of summer... that could cause usage to drop. Nope, nothing.

If Spanish speakers want a machine translated version of the site, they're quite capable of feeding it to a machine translator themselves. You can even make it easy for them, with buttons and whatnot.

But when you feed them MT without asking, a lot of the time they have to mentally translate borked translations back into English, just to understand what the author was trying to say. In terms of conveying what the writer was trying to say, all translations (but especially MT) can ONLY do worse than the original.

This is the no-brainer, rule #1 for machine translation: Let the user decide!

I am not sure what you mean. I put the focus on how people see the world around them - whether justified or not - and if the justice system fails(is that what you mean?) that would a real world factor contributing to that. Poverty is a factor, but not by itself. Having a future to work for or not is a factor.

Only 17 times. That means Germany is having a problem.

But the part which shocks me about the US is that there are already far more people in prison than elsewhere. I don't think this can be reduced to poverty either, it's about an overall breakdown of trust, that everyone is on their own, there is no society they have to uphold, and they should steal anything they can get away with.

You don't fix that by being tough on crime. It may be a component though.

I have this plugin which helps me fill in the captcha, even does it for me. It's only the start though, the next generation of captchas requires more advanced tools to answer them and guess who is making and selling those tools? The same guys who are making the captchas.

Yeah, if I see an English language channel with a title translated into borked Norwegian, I set "never recommend this channel".

It's a basic principle of machine translation that you let the user do it, if they need it. You do not do it for them. Quite often we have to back-translate from bork to English, to understand what the hell they were trying to say in the first place. It's the opposite of helpful, it creates more and harder translation work for the user.

Possibly the Hunter Biden/Ukraine corruption business.

Clearly it's got some of that alien tech. The latter also picked the worst time to develop a fault.