Comment Re:I used to be a PC-only gamer (Score 1) 41
Many, many PC games can be played with a controller connected to the PC's USB port. Support for HID protocol and XInput protocol is widespread.
Many, many PC games can be played with a controller connected to the PC's USB port. Support for HID protocol and XInput protocol is widespread.
Gaming exclusively on modern consoles on grounds that games for Linux or Windows are presumed malware means you'll probably get indie games years late or never. This is because it takes time for an indie developer to build enough of a reputation in the industry to become eligible to buy a devkit for a modern console.
Unless by consoles, you mean things like the NES and Genesis, which are still getting brand-new indie games decades after Nintendo and Sega stopped supporting them.
That is how it's been, Those AI tools were trained on open source/public domain content, so any contribution by AI tools must be considered released under public domain. It does not get simpler than that, and current US copyright law has already indicated that any AI created works are not eligible for copyright
That's not the question.
The question is whether the AI-produced code is a derivative of existing code, and the answer is still not resolved.
In some cases, the answer is a clear YES, because the code is a direct copy of something written by someone else. If something like that ends up in the kernel, it will have to be removed when someone notices.
Say your reactor has a neutron injector on a rotor. The fission fuel has started vibrating, creating a feedback loop that could cause the reaction to become unstable. Running the rotor in reverse would change the pattern of incident neutrons just enough to stop the vibration. And the way you make a rotor go the other way is by reversing the polarity of its drive current.
That's the best that I could ground this technobabble off the top of my head.
especially with how tepid the results are for the money poured in, it seems much more the case that we are seeing a lot of nakedly cynical playing of the 'give us what we want, lest the chinese win' by people who are otherwise on deeply shaky ground
I'm ok with it as long as I don't have to bail it out if it fails.
They could do it like Sling, which has two basic tiers: Orange and Blue. Blue has the limited basic channels and a bunch of channels from programming providers other than Disney. Orange has limited basic and Disney, fewer channels and fewer simultaneous streams than Blue, with an "Orange & Blue" add-on tier that adds the missing channels from Blue.
Plausible subjects include either "The government's competition regulator" or "A coalition of multichannel video distributors". Which was it?
Disney requires specific channels to be at the basic tier of a multichannel video provider's offering, not a "sports" tier. Last I checked (today), multichannel IPTV provider Sling worked around this by offering two different basic plans: "Orange" with ESPN and other Disney properties and "Blue" with more channels but no Disney. Orange subscribers can add the extra Blue channels on a second "Orange & Blue" tier.
You obviously spent those days watching Pat Robertson because CBN was literally the only ad free channel on cable that anybody actually watched in the earlier days. And as far as I know, it's still ad free.
CBN operated from 1977 through 1997, showing ads starting in 1981 and taking the name The Family Channel in 1988. Beginning in 1997, CBN was reduced to a paid programming arrangement to show The 700 Club on what is now Disney's Freeform channel. There are, however, numerous other religious channels under a viewer donation arrangement like what you describe, such as EWTN. And in 2008, CBN started a second channel called CBN News, first online and then with a handful of broadcast affiliates.
Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!