Humans are not prevented from using copyrighted content to train themselves, so why would we restrict AI models in this way?

Because the current so-called "AI" are neither human nor sentient. We do not allow humans to download lots of copyrighted material and use it for whatever they want - there are restrictions on what humans are allowed to do with that material. One of those restrictions could be using it to train an "AI" language model. Even if what that system does is exactly identical to what a human would do when reading it, we can still restrict someone from using it this way because an "AI" language model is not a human.

If/when we get to the point where we start to question if our "AI" systems are sentient, then maybe we should explore their rights, but currently they are just tools that humans use, and we certainly can restrict the use of such tools.

Had I driven to Ogdensburg, NY, it would have cost me less than $150 at the ER and $20 in gas.

I think you underestimate the likely ER costs. A quick visit to a facility in Aspen CO back in 2009 for my child's vomiting (diagnoses as altitude sickness) was billed at over $2000 USD.

Having done remote troubleshooting with parents, young adults, and clients of all ages, this is by no means universally true. Maybe less than 1% of the population have issues with these things, but somehow I seem to end up with all of them calling me to help them deal with it. The fact that everyone's cell phone has a flashlight and a camera on it has made remote assistance way easier these days, let me tell you, these things are not obvious to everyone.

A significant part of the population has absolutely no useful mental model of how electricity in their home works, or what switches and circuit breakers do. I really have no idea how they think things work, but whatever their mental model is, it does not help them notice switches that are out of place.

To be fair, I have had challenges in the dark corner of the basement, with faded orange markers, figuring out which breaker is tripped. The tripped breaker switch typically only moves partway to the other side, and needs to be moved completely OFF before it can be clicked back to ON - and some people cannot figure that out without instruction.

Someone should maybe write a book with info on how to reset breakers, jiggle the toilet handle to untangle the flapper-chain, and other things like that.

To be fair, if they gave the money to the employees they would get the same dollar value tax deduction - salaries, donations, advertising - they are all deductible business expenses.

I suppose with employee payments they may also be on the hook for things like social security employer payments.

Oh, the linked video is someone who is testing a feature for possible use in the future. Testing your file backups, brakes, smoke detectors or emergency lights before you actually need to use them wouldn't really qualify as "a research project" for most readers, but describing it that way I suppose is technically correct.

I guess I misunderstood you. I thought your reference to "research project" was a statement about the feature not being available outside of lab prototypes.

I think a better phrasing of your intent might have been: "Practically nobody actually uses those features."

A counter of this might be "well, if the feature is impossible, that will never change".

I certainly think that the availability of these types of features are a selling point, at least to me, and I imagine to the AC - so there are at least two of us, even without actually using it very often (or at all).

The Hyundai Ioniq 5 provides this type of thing. Maybe others?

From the "Technology Connections" guy:
"A 24-hour test run of the Hyundai Ioniq 5's Vehicle-to-Load function"
https://youtu.be/yO5fJ8z66Z8

Or maybe that doesn't qualify? I guess it is really just an "AC power socket".

You pay in cash.

Without a loan, the dealership is MUCH less interested in dealing with you, and much less interested in giving you a low price.

I think the modern plan here is to take all the financing incentives that they can offer you, then once everything is finished, you pay off the loan with that cash. Yes, this does screw over the dealership because all the kickbacks that they thought they were getting, that they used to give you a super low price, will now never get paid, but they made the system to exploit the consumer so I am not sad if the consumer exploits them.

I think that all auto loans can be paid off in full very early in the process, with little to no penalty. Of course this is something you need to ensure for whatever loan you might sign up for.

I think Brother has had a few incidents when they have started to go overboard with the DRM on supplies too, but that said they have been my go-to choice for purchases and recommendations due to their better support of macOS and Linux machines.

I am pretty sure that stealing tip money is also illegal when the staff is paid above minimum wage. Pooling of tip legislation I believe varies from state to state, but the owner or management is never allowed to be part of that pool.

But all else being equal it remains that someone who genuinely believes their religion has a two factor lock whereas someone without has only their continued whim to keep the promise.

The thing is, we can never know, even in theory what anyone "genuinely believes". Giving any "extra" weight towards those who take oaths with religious symbolism provides an incentive to be disingenuous. How can you possibly tell if someone is sincere about the form of their oath? Who is likely to be more trustworthy - someone who takes an oath in a religious manner because of societal pressure or someone who takes an oath in a format against that pressure?

Religious believers and non-believers alike have a host of reasons beyond their religion to keep (or break) their word. The psychologists and sociologists study honesty and trustworthiness with dozens of motivations. Level of religiosity has very little impact on people's behavior in this area.

As a counter to the idea that the religious might have more incentive towards trustworthiness, I recall comedian Emo Philips recognized humanities ability to justify almost any action as being moral.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I said to myself "Emo! God doesn't work that way!" So I stole a bike and prayed for forgiveness. - Emo Philips

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

To me the oath is more of statement. This individual used their statement to express disdain for the Constitution. That alone could be considered grounds for impeachment.

They would probably argue that they were expressing a strong support for the constitutional system under which they were operating. Specifically, Article Six of the constitution forbids religious tests for public office. How does holding a book while swearing an oath "express disdain for the Constitution"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It might "express disdain" towards those who hold other books I suppose, but couldn't the same charge be laid against anyone who shows a preference for any particular behavior?

I'm not saying this has never occurred in the third largest country in the world, with the third largest population in the world with at least 50 different states in charge of education, and differing governance across each of those states.

With that said, what has been described is not the case in any of the areas I am acquainted. Blaming this type of thing on "unions" seems a bit of a stretch too. How about blaming it on litigation fearful administrators? Or generalized lack of respect for education and/or educators? Blame the parents? Blame Canada?

I would like to see studies on rates of "oath keeping" by methods of swearing and religiosity. I suspect that there is almost zero impact by method - any one individual probably "keeps their word" at similar rates if they use a holy book and place hand on heart or if they merely "pinky swear". I also would not be surprised to learn that atheists had similar (or higher) rates of "word keeping" than otherwise similar "people of faith". My experience is that the vast majority of "reliable" people are that way due to social/cultural influences that may or may not be correlated with religiosity.

Such studies would be challenging to implement and analyze I am confident.