Actually you raise a good point.

YT swears that humans are involved in the "review" process associated with demonetization or community guideline strikes but there is an overwhelming mountain of evidence that points to the fact that a "manual review" consists of running the content past another AI system (which invariably produces the same result).

Surely, if users of YT are now required to honestly disclose when they use AI then YouTube itself should do likewise and stop lying about it.

As someone who enjoys using VFX in some of my videos, where will I stand?

Some of those videos portray events that never actually happened or create an illusion by compositing hand-crafted images or models into real-world scenes.

This is *NOT* AI but for all intents and purposes it has the same effect.

So will VFX artists have an exemption or do they risk being falsely accused under YT's new rules if it's alleged that their videos involve AI rather than just good old hard-work and VFX?

And the legal liabilities associated with any bad-apps that get through the testing and impose harm or loss on the user.

Given that it was a totally automated landing and that its own lidar sensors were broken such that it had to use the ones on a NASA payload to complete the landing, it could well be that it has landed in a deepish crater -- which would explain the very weak radio-signal. The walls of that crater could be blocking the signal. This is because landing on the South Pole means that earth is very low on the horizon so it doesn't take much of a hill to get in the way of the signal.

Source? That sounds unlikely, for almost all users the new M1s were exactly like the old ones - just with a lot better performance and longer battery life. They didn't change the designs. Unless you ran virtual machines like me, you wouldn't miss out on anything you had either.

Once Plex started trying to charge me for casting to my SONOS devices I moved to emby.

https://emby.media/index.html

They do have some smart TV support:

https://emby.media/community/i...

Of all the publicly accessible AI systems Bard is the worst by far. There's no way I'd pay $20 a month for it.

It is unbelievably "woke" and many of the responses to queries that do sneak past its firewall of "we must not offend" are just totally wrong.

Google are a long way behind in this area -- which probably explains why the AI behind all the moderation stuff-ups on YouTube is so bad.

We had no option but to use tape to write-protect on our 128Kbyte hard-sectored 8-inch floppy drives. Oh, we're not going that far back? :-)

Home computers were pretty common here, but they were VIC 20/CBM 64/Amigas, ZX Spectrums and the like. PCs were crazy expensive, and not nearly as capable in many respects - in particular, graphics and sound.

In 1993 I started university (Norwegian Institute of Technology) and bought a 486 DX33 with a hard drive, 8 MB memory, 512 kB S3 graphics card, and a 15" screen. That cost approx 4000 USD - or more than 8000 USD now. That was a local PC building company, so cheaper than most of the competition. Compared to that, a Mac these days is a bargain.

Even the Vision Pro compares favorably to it, but it's going to be obsoleted by newer, far better versions - and I really fail to find a usecase anyway. "What would I actually use it for?"

I asked it to create an image of an eVTOL flying car in flames.

It responded:

Of course *EVERYONE* who sees an image of a flying car in flames will be "inspired" to recreate that scene in real life.

What are you smoking BARD?

We are all such snowflakes that we must be protected from evil images of scenes that may become commonplace in the not-so-distant future :-(

We recommend using a .22 calibre firearm if you plan to commit suicide. It discharges a less harmful bullet than larger calibres but is still more than enough to kill you.

Sounds straight forward but any time there's mention of an obelisk you should always check for an asterisk (in case there are special conditions that apply) :-)

I was imprecise. I meant 30-40% of traffic deaths, not just accidents. And they do forensic analysis of all of those, as well as those with serious personal injuries. Having fewer of those accidents help, we've got about 1/6th of the death rate per capita compared to the US (about 1/3rd looking at deaths per km).

It not 10 over the speed limit, it's "10 above max speed limit" - meaning "not above 80 mph on public roads".

In Norway, speed is the main factor in about 30-40% of accidents.. Also, the rule doesnt seem to be "max 10 mph above speed limit",but "max 10 mph above max speed limit". There's not a lot of scenarios where that limit - 80 mph - should be an actual problem.