All it does is make it so that the ability to get a ticket shifts from having more money to he who gets there first, which isn't really a huge tradeoff.
The reality is that if the tickets are selling out that fast and they're being resold for significantly more than the original price, then they were underpriced to begin with.
The main question is if the plant is still safe. It hasn't been used in years. Is it still in good maintenance? Was the design meant to be idled for years? What are the risks of restarting that particular design of reactor after all those years? Is the land there safe for workers of the plant after reactor 2's accident all those years ago? And what plans are in place to prevent what happened at reactor 2 from happening at reactor 1?
I actually don't know the answer to any of those questions. But I hope experts are actively asking those.
I don't think the US actually enforces anything approaching the spirit of robust anti-trust law now. The goalposts have been moved back so many times, they're on another field now.
"you are posting on Slashdot..."
so does SuperKendall.
"..buy some long
with what money?
"you'd make enough to keep the mortgage current"
what mortgage?
"... after there return of the principle"
Sure,
Let them eat cake.
LOL as if cryptocurrencies are anything other than manufactured scarcities of literally no value. This is what you get when you employ AI to manufacture prose in support of fraud.
"Too much drinking, crap eating, and not exercising enough eventually takes their toll."
sure, it must be because of their inferiority and not because you have simply forgotten. Could not possibly be you.
Correct. The article says this:
"The researchers then fed the data into machine learning algorithms trained to recognize faces."
What is "the data" here? We don't know.
The article wants to suggest that some people view portions of data more selectively but it doesn't say that. Also, what are the "earliest stages of visual processing"? They say "retinal encoding" but if that's true then the OP's description of what was done wouldn't show anything.
Really isn't. I haven't seen cursive anywhere but on documents in a museum at any point in my life. That includes signatures, which are more likely to be a squiggle than anything resembling actual cursive. There is zero point to mandatory instruction on it anymore (if there ever was- the idea that it was a faster way of writing is backed by 0 proof. And even if it was, the ease of reading script more than cancels out those speed gains).
I don't think that's it. Gaming PC's generally cost more than a console, and the "general purpose PC that can also dabble in some gaming" is becoming less common. It seems that people are buying less PC's but those who are still buying them are often buying them for a purpose.
I think it's that "gaming" (and by that I need AAA high dollar value gaming as opposed to casual cell phone/mobile device gaming) is becoming a little more niche of a hobby. Niche hobbies often have high costs associated with them because the small group of people who are willing to participate are willing to unload large sums of money into it.
PC gaming has always been where the best performance and visuals have been available - and it could just be that the remaining customer base are the ones who want that whilst more casual people are fine using their mobile devices for playing a different type of game.
I will say personally I've always bought consoles strictly for exclusives, while always also maintaining a gaming PC as well. As exclusives become less of a thing and everything seems to be available on PC anyways, I have little incentive to actually buy a console anymore.
General purpose PC's are becoming more rare, but it seems like gaming PC's are starting to account for a larger chunk of the PC population. In general it seems like people who just want to do mundane tasks are largely moving away from full PC to tablets and smartphones, but people who actually want to game are still very much getting PC's to do it on.
I'm an old fart who still games, but every one of my 3 teenage nieces have asked me to build them a gaming PC because it's a "cool kid" thing to have one.
I'm not sure DRM is hugely necessary. So many games do online play now that just getting a pirated copy of something generally isn't as functional. And honestly the LAST thing I'd do in modern times is run executable code from some random torrent site. Media files for audio and/or video sure, but anything executable is a no-go for me.
I don't know - maybe its because I'm not the broke teenager I once was, but I haven't pirated a game in probably 20 years. If you wait most of them will be $5 or less eventually on steam anyways.
Equating AI with Pac-Man isn't really the intellectual flex you probably think it is.
Anthropic's entire pitch has always been safety. Innovation like this tends to favor a very few companies, and it leaves behind a whole pile of losers that also had to spend ridiculous amounts of capital in the hopes of catching the next wave. If you bet on the winning company you make a pile of money, if you pick one of the losers then the capital you invested evaporates. Anthropic has positioned itself as OpenAI, except with safeguards, and that could very well be the formula that wins the jackpot. Historically, litigation and government sponsorship have been instrumental in picking winners.
However, as things currently stand, Anthropic is unlikely to win on technical merits over its competition. So Dario's entire job as a CEO is basically to get the government involved. If he can create enough doubt about the people that are currently making decisions in AI circles that the government gets involved, either directly through government investment, or indirectly through legislation, then his firm has a chance at grabbing the brass ring. That's not to say that he is wrong, he might even be sincere. It is just that it isn't surprising that his pitch is that AI has the potential to be wildly dangerous and we need to think about safety. That's essentially the only path that makes his firm a viable long term player.
TRANSACTION CANCELLED - FARECARD RETURNED
