But here is the problem even as a first pass it is bad as a first pass. Let's do a first pass and I get somebody who has rigged the paper to pass through the system. If we see a B or even an A and assume the system assignment is correct then we have a false negative. Thus if this happens often enough what then? How can you trust a system that has that? You have to read each and every one of the papers, which puts us right back in square one.
It is very much a monopoly issue. Think of it as follows. You have a company that controls the platform. Then they create a media platform where Apple is a preferred media player. After all trying to get Apple TV working well on non Apple devices is a non-starter. It is kinda there, but it is really is just there for show. Now with one of these shows they create is something that could be considered as comedy journalism.
Thus comes the question are they allowed to use their platform which dominates as a censor? The natural answer seems to be yes they can do what they want. HOWEVER they have a monopoly and thus the rules change. Thus the question from the government is, what were the conditions of this cancellation? Maybe it is abusive power, maybe not, but you don't know until you ask questions.
I am asking this seriously, where can retail get batteries this cheap? I want to build an electrical boat and need a lead on this. Thank-you
This is not a break through whatsoever and sounds more like propaganda than helpful information. The problem with Teslas is that they are not repairable and hence written off sooner than other cars. Meaning the insurance costs will be higher. In other words Tesla cheaps out so that the client can shoulder the costs.
As somebody who has done AI for a very long time this is scary and not being paranoid. Let me explain, and I will use a programming example.
Imagine I am writing code, and there is some AI that follows me. I write a loop, and some conditions, and the AI learns about those loops and conditions. Then the AI in some other context creates a loop and a condition, but entirely different, is it copying me?
The simplistic argument is no it is not. I argue yes it is because of a major difference in how we and AI learn. Even though that new loop and condition can be written by myself I don't actually copy, even if it is similar or copy and pasted. I learned how to program using the basic steps of the programming language. Meaning I learned what loops are, I learned what conditions are. I learned how to apply each of them. The AI on the other hand only learned my end result. Meaning if I was to tell the AI that a loop is a condition and vice versa then the AI would follow that, even though I would not be fooled.
And therein lies the problem, the AI is not learning, it is a grand scheme copying machine hidden in supposedly learning abilities. And yes that is wrong and infringes on copyright.
In the context of the artist it is extremely scary because the end result is the only thing the AI learns. It does not understand how to apply strokes, it just sees a stroke and copies it. Meaning if somebody did X technique of doing a stroke, then the AI will copy it and use it for something else.
So who was surprised by this? Apple is in the Ballmer years where innovation and design don't matter. Cook is a number cruncher and has zero vision ability. Not saying it is a bad thing. It is a bad thing when you are CEO of the company. Cook needs to take a hands off attitude and begin to take a risk. Steve Jobs was quite ruthless in that if the design cannibalized the existing products and is a better design so be it. Cook is not able to do that and that is why Apple is not getting anywhere anymore.
This is where I like to call BS. Right now there is less wear and tear. Just like when the Model T came out there was not much wear and tear as well. However, as time progresses there will be more wear and tear because of the way that we will be using the vehicle. And there will be more wear and tear on the vehicle because more efficient and cheaper parts will be used. That is only natural.
Today cars are nearly indestructible, if they build it to be... Otherwise it is there to make money.
Are you fracken kidding me?
This is simple to understand... It is why people like chips, sundaes and things that are bad for us. We like it because it rubs us the right way. There is no deep meaning, or some bigger than life understanding. It is simple enjoyment in its simplest form. Critics don't like that because it would mean that they can't dissect the plot, or give some in depth meaning to things. Not surprising.
Apparently he took out a "Flash Loan" and borrowed the tokens. Once he executed his trades to grab the money he bought up enough tokens to repay the loan and all was fine.
It seems it is totally normal for 18-year-olds to take out multi-million dollar loans with no collateral to back them in the crypto world? I feel like this points to a whole lot of other potential problems in the crypto/DeFi world.
No idea why you are rated down, or zero. IMO your comment while snarky is very insightful. I would agree with you entirely.
Rust doesn't have that problem because it has not been around for 40 years or so. Let's see how good Rust is after 40 years of development and re-development. When I can green field a project, it is always better. My experience has been that it does not matter which language you use there will always be garbage, inefficiencies, and so on. Newer languages just fix the idiot problems.
You only need a something over 50% of the mining power -- as long as they can add new blocks with no Assange transactions at a faster pace than than the rest of the mining pool they can keep the longest chain Assange donation free. A 51% attack isn't just for double spending, and simply blocking particular transactions is the kind of thing you might be able to get tacit agreement for; and it does only have to be tacit if you are fine with a few transactions getting through every now and then (which also helps hide any collusion).
Hell, he is polling at less than half of Rick Lynn Perry, who is not the former Governor Rick Perry but a "senior desktop technician" currently contracted out by a staffing agency to work for Lockheed-Martin.
It solves the problem of "where do I go if Powers That Be decide to boot me off traditional wire transfer systems". Like has already happened in case of Julian Assange and his legal defense fund.
It swaps in some different powers that be. If Wikileaks published something that embarrassed people behind a bunch of the major miner consortiums and they decided to just not include any bitcoin transfers to Assange or Wikileaks in blocks they mined that could severely limit or completely stop such transfers, depending on how big a proportion of the mining pool they pissed off. And let's be clear, there are a very small number of mining consortiums that control a very large fraction of the total hashing power; this is a lot more possible than it may appear at first blush.
Hell, even the old school powers that be could put a severe crimp in things if they were sufficiently motivated. If such a power decided to lean on the mining consortiums they could likely get the result they want with either enough bribes or a big enough stick (and they would have both).
Good day to avoid cops. Crawl to work.
