Translation: We want our AI models to learn how YOU complete your everyday tasks so that it can replace you as soon as possible.

Do Know Evil, indeed.

That's not what the people behind this age verification push want, though. They want you to be identifiable. They want to be able to track everything you do. Tracking for advertising plays a big part, of course, but mostly governments want a record of every single thing you do and they want it stored forever in case there's any reason they need to get rid of you in the future.

Of course, people will just go right on paying whatever they are told...at least in the U.S. If there's one thing we've learned from the post-COVID inflation surge, it's that people won't give up the things they want just because you've made them unaffordable. $7 for a bag of chips? Gimme. $11 for a 12-pack of Coke? Yes sir. $15 hamburger meal from McDonald's? Need it.

"The tool won't be used for evaluation purposes"...Oh, it will be, just maybe not officially. And it won't reward those who limit their time to "avoid burnout."

As if I needed another reason to not use Teams...

wHy dONt tHeY jUSt MAkE tHe CoFFeE iN aMeRicA? Derp.

Netflix has always been more interested in quantity over quality. 90% of their original movies are the cinematic equivalent of shovelware. They get a cheap director, writer, and they might even splurge for a semi-big name actor or two for the cast...but then they just shoot the first draft of the script as quickly and cheaply as possible. They will put in a decent effort on a couple of movies a year because they are still trying to get that Oscar win they keep pushing hard for, but other than that, it's all disposable garbage.

One of the biggest problems with dark scenes on streaming is the video compression crushes the details out of shadows and poorly lit scenes, making everything look darker than it did when it was originally edited. The Battle for Winterfell looks fine on disc, but terrible when it was originally streamed.

I understand he can't "release" it, but could he, say, store the source on some sort of cloud server that was left completely unprotected from read access by the public solely due to an accidental oversight?

These is my thoughts exactly, too. A conversational bot put forth by OpenAI carries the exact same responsibilities and liabilities as a human employee of the company would. If the technology driving the LLM is not sufficient to meet these standards, it should not be offered for use.

Nobody learned and everyone is still running this crap. And McAfee/Trellix. My work laptop behaves like a machine from 2002 because all of the "security" software constantly eating resources. It would be expensive for companies to actually care about security, so they just all run the same garbage so when they get hacked they can just say..."Whaaat? It's not OUR fault. We were following 'industry standard best-practices'. Don't blame us".

Inconvenience is not an excuse for ignoring the law. If I have a business idea and the only way I can implement it is by breaking the law, it means I can't do that thing. It doesn't mean I can just ignore the law that is stopping me from doing what I want.

It's so rare that Disney is the good guy these days...

Well, they are the same people who keep blocking efforts to end child marriages, so that tracks.