It's not a problem when cloning closed source if the AI wasn't trained on that closed source code.
Seems like a good test then. If it can do that with closed source, there is no logical reason to assume it could not do the same with open source it had never seen, whether it actually had or not. Spin up another and do it again like that just to be sure if you must, but it's probably a done deal at that point.
That's certainly how Trump made his money, he didn't pay for all his bankruptcies out of his own pocket!
Trump did not make any money. He inherited it.
you've made up an absurd analogy and then incorrectly said "this is equivalent" A phone company executive would be sent to jail if they ignored a national security letter about terrorist activity on one of their lines.
I'd mod this funny if I had not already posted.
Obviously a gun can be used as a weapon without killing or even being fired, both offensively and defensively, so this doesn't capture the whole picture of gun use as weapons; nevertheless the data shows that what people think guns are for is not in fact what they are primarily used for.
They can also be used to kill animals rather than people. Most guns by far are used for killing paper targets. It irks many of the anti-gun people greatly that shooting is part of several Olympic sports.
The toll company goes to the rental agency and says, "this is your car, pay up!". The rental agency pays the toll company, and then bills their customer. This is the sane way to handle things.
Should the ISP pass everybody who feels they are owed something's bills along, or just the MAFIAA? Should they be liable for bogus bills? You seem to want them to be liable so it would be sensible for them to independently verify them first. Of course that would require metering end examining everyone's usage, in which case you might as well just make them the internet police straight up. So was that your plan, or did you not think many steps ahead here?
the broader implications of this are huge. are automakers responsible when someone breaks the speed limit and kills someone? after all they're the ones who make vehicles that are, from the persepective of many, unnecessarily powerful. what about guns? or any other product & service that can be used for harm or theft?
I think SCOTUS answer in this case can be safely extrapolated to all those things. Tool makers are not responsible for tool abuse. That this is even a question to begin with makes me shake my head.
See what happens if gas prices keep increasing.
Same thing as last time I expect. It is a temporary thing.
Did you even read the headline? That "when it works" means "this is the fantasy, not the reality".
Yup, read the headline. Also applied the fantasy patches, which leads me to believe it is getting better much faster than you are.
Bullshit. Plenty of countries in the EU won't allow the cybertruck due the ability to injure pedestrians.
Pedestrians and vehicles don't mix. I've often likened this to putting dogs and cats in the same kennel and considering muzzles a eminently sensible compromise. It's not as bright as you think it is.
Dead? No excuse for laying off work.
