Comment FoxGPT (Score 2) 22
is what they really want.
is what they really want.
That's odd. I need large fonts, but I find dark mode unreadable. Black on cream or light beige is about ideal.
When you say "STEM vs pretend degrees", you clearly don't know what you're talking about. There is a near continuum of "hardness" of subject, and even that's not well defined, and the quesiton of whether EE is harder than pure math doesn't have a clear answer, but which way you answer definitely affects what the opposite is.
E.g., "German" is not a STEM major, but it's also not a pretend degree. OTOH, Philosophy is often a fluff major, but some of them attempt to be as rigorous as any experimental physicist. (Most don't succeed, because it's a really difficult thing to do.)
The supremacy clause applies to LAWS. Congress declined to enact such a law.
Yes, it belongs to Congress, not the President. Executive orders are literally orders given by the President to the executive branch of the federal government.
So the effectiveness of an executive order is very questionable in this case. If a state passes a law, what's the executive order going to do? Send the Army to invade? What could go wrong?
Outlawing home schooling is too dangerous. Also MOST homeschooling is destructive, but some is the exact opposite.
I'll agree that home schooling is destructive to society, even when making accommodation to geniuses and other "special needs" students, but it's destructiveness isn't even the same order of magnitude as that of "social media". (I'll agree that social media needn't be destructive, but just about all of it is.)
Was that from "Blazing Saddles"?
That's not going to apply to factories that are built for full automation. And it's reported that that's the way the Chinese build auto manufacturing plants.
Full automation is probably an overstatement, but nearly full automation will still mean that health insurance isn't a major part of the expense.
PHB1: "We have to do something AI-ish, everyone else is!"
PHB2: "Here's one, have bots compile podcasts from our news articles."
PHB1: "Brilliant! Make it so."
[months later]
PHB2: "Um, the podcast bot has been making silly errors. Should we keep it?"
PHB1: "How is our competition doing with their AI?"
PHB2: "They suck also."
PHB1: "Okay, let's keep it so we can have AI on our brochures and resumes."
I suspect that if you buy the token, you don't own the stock.
Others have claimed that this is just using blockchain as the accounting log, but I'm dubious.
I don't think this counts as a marketing release, at least not one directed at people rather than corporations.. It's "interesting tech news".
If I were Robert De Niro or Taylor Swift, I wouldn't care if an ad says "this is AI" on it, I'd freaking sue if an ad looked like me or sounded like me.
That's what the second bill is for, apparently. Isn't this already covered in US laws though? Here in the Netherlands we have had "portrait rights" for over a century, basically it means that you have a say in how your likeness is being used in publications, and you can forbid publication if you have a good reason. Reasons include protecting one's reputation, but also the use of a famous person's likeness without their permission. The law also protects persons after their death, but only for a period of 10 years. Because of AI, they are now considering extending that period.
The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.