Having an f/.95 aperture doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot the surface area of your sensor is a fraction of a square millimeter. My S24 has an f/1.7 lens on its main camera and it still produces pathetic output compared to a $400 mirrorless camera with a kit lens.
One question then is why this hasn't happened in the US? One explanation is that the US had the illusion of a not deeply strong President, in part because everyone (including the Presidents) agreed tacitly not to push the limits of their authority that much. The precedent breaking nature here undermines that illusion, and makes it more likely that we'll have years (possibly decades) where the Democrats and Republicans will even more than usual treat everything as a zero sum game with no respects for democratic norms.
Lots of great points. The first thing a D president will do is fire all the R appointees, not just the traditional political appointees who leave when the President does. Then the next R does the same, resulting in a very unstable governance environment that will negatively impact the economy as companies can't plan long term in such a regulatory environment. Then there's the whole "lets get revenge on the other side by prosecuting/investigating them" payback game.
The bottom line is that everything about this is bad.
Very true, but one side is gloating over their wins and will be screaming when the very environment they created is turned on them. Not good in any way.
ChatGPT does correctly capture the attitude of the US mainstream news media, so I'll give it credit for that.
Interesting insight. I suspect the results are due to the data used for trading. Unless it scrapes and is able to parse a large number of languages any output will be biased to its data and provide a viewpoint slanted to one geopolitical area. In addition, if one POV is overrepresented I think it would tend to favor that one, even if the amount of data is not well correlated with the % of a population who holds that view.
Ah, but are there cute cat videos?
"It logically follows if there are no cute cats there can be no cute cat videos" -- ChatGPT
One change I'd make is let the H1-B holder be able to transfer it to a new employer after a year without enalty.
There is nothing stopping a second employer sponsoring a new H1B for someone who just entered the country on an H1B. No penalty today.
What does tend to stop H1B visa holders from transferring to a new employer are contracts that require the employee to repay moving and other costs: sometimes, somewhat inflated costs.
Which should be outlawed to prevent such limits to transferring, that was teh sort of penalties I was referring to as well. If teh H1B truly has very difficult to find skills let them come in and compete at true free market rates once sponsored; a year would be the time for calculating ROI.
I think for any company that truly is using H1B's to bring in talented workers who they want to employ it will encourage them to sponsor green card applications with a higher frequency rather than using the H1B model to keep workers as indentured servants. I'm good with that because someone coming in on a green card has the option to compete in the market and receive market rates. It may even cause companies to consider going back to hiring local talent and *gasp* actually doing career development.
The problem I see is unless there is a fast track green card process it will take a lot longer to get them onboard. One change I'd make is let the H1-B holder be able to transfer it to a new employer after a year without enalty. That would make companies be a lot more selective and likely raise wages to the point US workers are competitive.
Judging from what I've seen, if WDC trademarked the original Steamboat Willie character and renewed the mark as required, it has been in use continuously via pins, toys, etc..
You technically don't have to renew the mark - you just have to use it. Registering the mark is useful in legal proceedings, but even without registration it doesn't mean there's no protection in place. Most small businesses don't register their company name as a trademark, but the law still protects them from other companies trying to represent them falsely. It's just their damage claims will be limited and you'll have to prove usage.
Thanks for the clarification. Another interesting issue is the regionality of trademarks in such cases, something colleges ran into when sports all of a sudden made school's trademarks nationally recognized and schools discovered multiple schools using the same ones.
Steamboat Willie is in the public domain, so you are free to use it for your content. You cannot say it's Mickey Mouse, but you're free to do whatever you want - colorize it, etc. You can remove the ears off the mouse and modify the film that way to avoid trademark issues as well - you are free to create a derivative work of a public domain work. So if you wanted to replace Mickey with a human and use the rest of the imagery, you can.
I wonder if some of the confusion on
In fact, wasn't there a pornographic movie that was using Steamboat Willie? Disney didn't sue them, likely because they didn't have anything to sue over.
I'm guessing that would likely fall under parody exemptions, Steamboat Willy isn't the first to get such treatment.
Copyright law protects the author for 100 years, but there is no expiration date on a trademark as long as it is continuously in use and renewed every 10 years.
Judging from what I've seen, if WDC trademarked the original Steamboat Willie character and renewed the mark as required, it has been in use continuously via pins, toys, etc..
Writing a letter to a company asking them a question doesn't entitle you to an answer. Let alone a legally-binding answer. I can imagine it's reasonable to expect a positive answer if you are going to get sued. But for a company to explicitly declare you in the clear is a courtesy, not something I'd think you can compel.
I'm sure M&M would have replied with a clear answer if they represented Disney and the question was put to them. It seems just like another ploy to get news coverage. The more their name is out there, the more people know them and maybe call them when injured. I suspect they have lwayers smart enough to hav answered the question without asking Disney. As for Disney, I suspect they will do anything they can to protect their trademarks.
Like your presentation but not your Subject--even though I had a couple of negative encounters with rule-based librarians recently.
Tea, it wasn't meant as a shot at librarians but rather how AI is making people view them (and clickbait).
Unfortunately I think libraries are losing there relevance and it's related to the AI reference in your FP. However I just started thinking about a more insidious version of the problem. You can say that it's a big problem that generative AIs will fabricate BS, but even when we realize an answer is BS, we may learn the wrong lesson from it. After all, many of the AI answers are pretty good (on the theory you can make sufficient allowance for your own tendency to believe what you want to believe), so there's a kind of reinforcement in favor of those questions and prompts.
Good point. The reinforcing nature of AI do to prompt choices as well as design is an insidious feature that is no doubt viewed a a positive by companies since it keeps people coming back.
Most people like oracles and want to get "authoritative" answers to their questions.
Yet it's not so much that we may learn to think like machines (which is still a big problem), but rather that we may learn not to ask certain kinds of questions. We won't even be able to ask why those questions are so problematic because we already "know" the oracular AI can't handle them. (Even if the government or some greedy megalomaniac intervened to make sure the question was unanswerable.) Hallucinated books may the smallest of our future worries.
It think it's not just the authoritative nature but the belief that somehow AI is unbiased in the answers it provides. I have friends who truly believe, because AI has so much data the answers must be correct and unbiased, and GIGO is no longer a problem even though they are fishing in a data sewer.
(Also a concern that reading is being crushed by cute cat videos, but out of time just now...)
There is no such thing as a cute cat. ChatGPT told me so so that must be right.
People have an idea that international law doesn't work but the vast majority works fine, and we often just notice the serious failures and breakdowns, not all the stuff that is quietly working on a day-to-day basis.
International law works as long as the major powers want it to work.
My wife works in a library. Some of these people become not just defensive, but outright hostile.
I suspect part of it is also being told something they asked for is incorrect and taking it a being told they are wrong and thus taking it personally, even when though that is not the librarian's intent.
They can barely make a phone at that price point.
Sure they can, they just don’t want to.
Most are bought by corps or individuals who treat them as an appliance.
Funny you mention corps. I work for a multinational and what our IT does is buy the base level as an appliance and then manually upgrade user RAM on an as needs / as approved basis. Multitasking rarely requires a higher end computer, but always requires more available RAM. Corps definitely play with this stuff.
Mine did too, but it was to circumvent a requirement to get CEO approval for purchases over x. We weren’t a multinational, ut would custom order laptops with no hard drive and hard drives separately so we weren’t below the limit and then put the machines together.
It appears that PL/I (and its dialects) is, or will be, the most widely used higher level language for systems programming. -- J. Sammet
