Comment Re:Could it be nobody buys them? (Score 1) 46
It could be that. What it definitely was, though, is that Sony thought they could make more money selling to data centers than to the public.
It could be that. What it definitely was, though, is that Sony thought they could make more money selling to data centers than to the public.
This is an interesting observation, but not entirely false. There are edits on Wikipedia that basically amount to "wiki link every word in the article". IMHO this could well be in violation of potential laws against algorithms. I'm not sure if Wikipedia should get a pass because it is "free" or whatever.
Wrong, âoeslopâ means excessive amout of AI content. It can be quite accurate and correct and still be called slop.
This could also be fake, designed to make people like that look stupid by basically satirizing their rants
Antiprotons, the forbidden PopRocks
Or some other Weekly World News cast member?
Only the customers with fancy GPUs have anything worth farming, and they probably want to run games on them instead.
Some states are not allowing RealID that has an address outside the voting precinct. This is why Student IDs are needed. Certainly when I was at school my driver's license indicated I lived in a different state.
ReadID does not include an indication of citizenship and non-citizens can get them.
It is unfortunate that some of the items that can be used to get a RealID are also proof of citizenship and thus they could have added this information to the card at that time. I'm not sure what to do if somebody thinks they are a citizen but lack any of the acceptable proofs, they may have to get the RealID without the citizenship indicator if they need it soon, and there will have to have another option than a RealID to register to vote.
None of this has anything to do with using RealID or any other license or card at the polling station. That is ONLY to prove you are using the right name, you have to be registered in order to vote.
You need ID to register to vote. Stop lying.
Do you carry your birth certificate with you because you needed it to get your passport?
The ID at voting is supposed to confirm that the person is a particular registered voter. If they are not allowed to vote then they would not be registered.
I do agree that people would feel more comfortable about the voting system if voters produced a physical object rather than the current scheme of saying a name that is registered and they can assume nobody else will say. If they allowed a few obvious things like Student ID's or utility bills the number of disenfranchised voters would be small enough that it would not effect the voting results (it would not be zero though so there will always be sob stories for opponents of ID). Crossing names off in a register is still going to be done since that is the real prevention of fraud (including stolen IDs), but public comfort even if it can be proven that the IDs do nothing can be considered a useful goal.
The Republican attacks on the ability to register to vote are pretty serious. IMHO anything done by the government that happens to know if you are eligible to vote should automatically register you, in particular getting a RealID drivers license, and quite a few methods of applying for benefits. The attacks on mail-in voting are also blatant, mail-in votes are a good deal more secure than any non-biometric ID since they require the voter to have access to the mailbox that the numbered ballot is delivered to. I also personally know I will be out of the country on Election Day so I am personally disenfranchised by this. The continuous claim that the only thing in that bill is ID at voting is a LIE, stop doing it.
I love this idea because I know the second a company using this crap gets bitten it's going to be an extremely expensive problem the fix
That's my gut reaction too -- this will result in software with obscure bugs that are near-impossible for a human to find or fix because no human even understands how the software works.
OTOH, maybe no human will need to find or fix the bugs, because they can task an AI to find and fix them instead. I'd say that strains credibility, but last year I would have said it strains credibility that an AI can understand (or, at least, "understand") human-written code as well as a human programmer, and yet here we are.
Maybe, but only a miniscule fraction of its energy is getting used, as I pointed out above
True, but I don't see how that's a problem for anyone.
Actually the companies generated quite a bit of greenhouse gases directly from mining, refining, and delivering the product. They are directly responsible for the vast majority of methane being emitted. People who buy methane tend to make sure it gets burned.
But I think the big deal is that they knew what the gases would do and did not tell anybody, and actively denied when others made the same conclusion. This is going to be difficult to prove without a lot of paper evidence that they did such research, however.
Correct. The people pushing for this law are admitting that climate change is real.
Your mode of life will be changed to EBCDIC.