Crypto transactions can be traced back through the (public) blockchain. A service where you deposit some tainted crypto and then are handed an equal value of others (minus a service charge) makes tracing those new coins back to their (illicit) source very difficult.
IOW, money laundering.
Miss.
If they could have the encryption present on the screen and the information only gets decrypted in your eyeballs with a valid subscription, they would.
That explains the banner I see in my field of vision: "libavcodec may be vulnerable..."
A bar I frequent has their TVs open to casting
And here come the studio's black helicopters and SWAT teams. Your bar has just violated one of the most precious market segmentation tools that content owners cherish: The ability to squeeze businesses for playing their stuff for exorbitant fees compared to home customers.
I find it interesting anyone would offload error detection and correction to application software. Not only are you needlessly increasing local complexity in doing that any possible machinery you implement to accomplish this in software is itself subject to failure from same sources of arbitrary corruption.
Why would someone do this instead of using hardware with some sort of RAS with memory mirroring, pool scrubbing, multi-bit error correction...etc? If you are extra paranoid just add more memory and or CPU cycles to meet your desired level of reliability.
It makes sense for high reliability systems to guard against hardware or software failures by having multiple discrete systems performing redundant operations and voting yet here the cause is the legendary cosmic ray. I don't understand why anyone would design a system like this.
Older hardware not compatible with Windows 11. [Ducking and running]
It's not the tools on the institutional end of the educational transaction that matter. Its what the students utilize to accomplish their end.
let SpaceX do it instead.
Want to motivate them to fix the service cabin? Offer them flights on the CST-100 instead.
Majority are pro putin there or they do not care, very few are truly against this or especially are vocal about it.
1. Survival.
2. Blind loyalty. Putin is an idiot. But he's OUR idiot.
That wasn't *all* I said, but it is apparently as far as you read. But let's stay there for now. You apparently disagree with this, whnich means that you think that LLMs are the only kind of AI that there is, and that language models can be trained to do things like design rocket engines.
The operative part of your 2nd sentence is the 'can be'.
It is premature to handwave this, particularly when so much of the market is made up of grifters who have already made impossible claims.
No, the things I was referring to using LLMs to predict protein shapes and evolution of plasma have already been demonstrated.
This isn't true. Transformer based language models can be trained for specialized tasks having nothing to do with chatbots.
That's what I just said.
No, what you said was the following "Artificial Intelligence is in fact many kinds of technologies. People conflate LLMs with the whole thing because its the first kind of AI that an average person with no technical knowledge could use after a fashion." Your statement is incorrect.
It's been, what, a week, and they got 6000 jets through maintenance during a very busy holiday travel season?
That speaks to fantastic logistics. There are anonymous folks out there who did a great job and deserve a ridiculously generous Christmas Bonus.
You cannot bypass solving the Navier-Stokes equations with transformers. You will, of course, get some predicted flows with a black box model, and you can, if you choose, claim that prediction accuracy is close enough for 85% of the random samples from your test data, but that will not get you new propulsion physics.
Who is talking about "new propulsion physics" and what does this even mean? What I mentioned has already been demonstrated using LLMs.
I've never seen polling to this effect. The best I've been able to find was a pew poll from early last year which stated 58% of government regulation does not go far enough WRT AI. The lack of useful specificity on what they mean by common sense is concerning. People should know what they are supporting beyond nebulous slogans especially in this space.
If AI ever really starts getting real it won't just be AI companies pushing for regulation to protect their own market share it will be industry generally to protect corporate interests from erosion by those who might leverage the technology to disrupt and displace them.
The billion dollar global scare mongering AI lobbying blitz after all was pushing FOR regulation not against it. What the AI companies are angry about is not a lack of regulation but regulation that cuts against their interests and patchwork regulation in which every state has their own disjointed set of rules.
The most immediate salient public threat from AI is those with power viewing AI as a source of more power. Insane money pouring into AI isn't just about misplaced investment it is driven by fever dreams of the powerful. None of what they are dreaming about has a nexus to the public good.
This is one case where details especially matter given both sides want regulation and there is no such thing as "common sense" when it comes to AI.
You had mail, but the super-user read it, and deleted it!
