Sometimes I wake up and start doing new science. But usually I just roll over and go back to sleep.

I wouldn't say pragmatic, no. He's tried it, found it works, and now won't listen to the people pointing out the numerous problems with it.

He has pointed out AI's flaws and limitations. He has also said the beneft is it gets him to the starting point more quickly to either figure out a bug or how to do something, or even how to rewrite something he's already done. He is not blindly accepting what it says.

Trust, but verify would be closer to his thinking.

Why is it all these earth like worlds exist, but no signs of life ?

We don't know that. There could be organisms living on one or more of these planets, but we can't detect them. Maybe it's a type of moss or simply bacteria.

Until we visit these planets, we cannot say with any certainty life doesn't exist on these worlds.

17 more years? I can't wait to see people in their 70's through 90's adventuring through the universe. Are stargates handicap-accessible?

Seriously though dude this is actually interesting science news vastly more important than some cheesy show.

Well, yes. For many years, presidential candidates, both Democratic and Republican, referred to the United States as "the indispensible nation". And my reaction was always, "Doesn't that mean the US is a single point of failure for civilization?"

We are currently performing an experiment which addresses this question: can the US enjoy the benefits of soft power without the cost? That's the whole point of obeying *norms*. No individual force is going to punish you if you are treacherous, mercurial, foul-mouthed, disrespectful and generally unpredictable. Everyone will punish you.

I think an inevitable cost of this experiment will be that the world will decide that the US can't be a single point of failure for global democracy any longer. In many ways, that's something that will be good for us. But it's also going to cost us in painful ways. When the world decides to move away from the dollar as the international reserve currency, you will see both inflation and higher interest rates on everything from credit cards to mortgages, to business loans that will offset the export advantages. We will need *more* business investment to shift the economy to producing low value goods again, so the transition will be rocky.

He's creating a "middle class" - they will get the info after the regular insiders, but before hoi polloi.

He should have thought of selling multiple levels of higher tiers.

For a small fee you can get your bullshit before everyone else.

Why more people are buying DVDs/blu-ray. They have the movie. They own it. It can't be taken from them. It won't change.

The same with books. No worrying that your digital copy will mysteriously disappear one night. You have the book. You bought it. It's yours. The words won't change.

Errr, hearing aids are significantly larger with standard hearing aid batteries being larger than airpods themselves,

No, they're not. My dad has hearing aids and they are about the same size as an airpod.

For reference, this is close to, but not the same as, what he has. This shows the size of the various airpod models. They are not "significantly larger" than a hearing aid, and in fact are nearly identical in size.

Like seriously that is an insanely ignorant example. Cheese also contains calcium so what excuse does chalk have for not being used as a sandwich topping?

Yes, your example is insanely ignorant. Cheese is a food. Chalk is not.

Copy protection on the original sleeping beauty is long expired.
Copy protection on the Disney version is good for years yet.

In the original versions, the scene i quoted? There is no scene like that in the original version. But it is beat for beat straight from the Disney version. If you want to tell a sleeping beauty story, you absolutely can, the original source material not copy protected, you can faithfully tell that story, including the unconscious rape of the princess to impregnate her so that she finally wakes up at child birth... or you can create more family friendly version all your own with whatever you like. But you can't simply lift a bunch of scenes that only exist in the copy protected Disney version and call it your own original interpretation by changing a few details.

The chatgpt story is a ripoff of the Disney version though.

The scene I quoted with the three "magical gaurdians" bestowing three gifts at a celebration crashed by the sorcerous who places the curse -- that is not from the original source material, its not novel either, its a scene ripped straight from the Disney version. And its not an isolated issue with the AI version.

There is no question that Disney doesn't "own" sleeping beauty, but they do own their telling of it. This was an obvious ripoff of that particular telling in several places.

If a child handed in the Moonlit Princess the teacher would give them a lecture about plagiarism. Because its not remotely original enough. It is so clearly taking so many things straight from Disney's version. Sure the names are changed, and the words "aren't the same", but its far too derivative of that particular version to credibly claim its an original telling of the sleeping beauty story.

"No. It is not copyright infringement"

Go ahead, prompt for that story and publish your own 'moonlit princess". It is not a court case you'd win; the details taken from the Disney version are beyond excessive.

" and there's no reason to hold copyright so sacred anyway. Are you seriously wanting to protect hundred year old fairy tails from being retold?"

That's an entirely separate discussion. Legally it is infringement. Whether it should be is completely separate question, or how long it should be are separate questions.

FWIW, I don't agree with copyright being 100 years.

Who is they? And what database are you referring to?

Dictionaries often contain quotes from original source material, or references to where it was first used, or first used a certain way.

Dictionary publishers have never been accused of downloading massive torrents of pirated copies of books and processing them.

Google on the other hand HAS been accused of that, and the decade of litigation related to that ultimately rules that the limited things google was doing with it was fair use. The dictionary companies are likely paying for enhanced access to that google data now.

The AI companies are singing the same fair use tune, but its really quite different. Google was doing it (at the time) to allow for search so you could enter phrase or quote and find the book it was from and the page it was on, and to collect other meta data - word count, word frequency, analyze sentence complexity, etc... all factual information.

AI companies are using the content of that digitized corpus and everything else they can get their hands on to generate new content, much of which non-factual in nature, and often very arguably explicitly creatively derivative.

prompt: "Make a story like sleeping beauty" ... 2 seconds later we have "The Moonlit Princess" and we'll just self-publish that on Amazon... boom I'm an author!

You seriously telling me this is NOT copyright infringement? Even if you wanted to argue that sleeping beauty is a classic fairytale from the 17th century and not under copyright, the prose above is a pretty blatant Disney ripoff.

I should have added:

"In general, renaming things does not fix a problem."

Though heaven knows, lots of stupid people try it.