This is a horseshit argument. Fair use was developed for human use, not use by an entity that is retaining vast amounts of what it processes verbatim. ChatGPT can reproduce about 40% of the Harry Potter series books verbatim. That means they have been reproduced in that data set, and that is being used for profit. It's plagiarism and FAR outside fair use.

"Guys, I think we really need to violate all of our norms and morals to beat the commies. Maybe some kind of authoritarian communist country. Just for a bit though, I promise we'll go back to democracy later".

I pay for API usage for a number of services - IP lookups, traffic through Cloudflare, tax information lookups, etc - and any one of them would, at a fair market rate for the services, bankrupt me if I needed to do 50 BILLION API HITS a year. That's insane. From a developer standpoint, I'm wondering if these services are doing a piss poor job of managing how and when they need to do API calls. That being said, do I think Conde Nast and CO would shamelessly money grab? Absolutely.

... and my worthless opinion is that significantly more jobs will be destroyed than created. All disruptions are not the same. Air travel creating steward positions is a shit example - entirely different type of disruption. As AI moves more and more into mainstream, the jobs created will tend to be higher skilled jobs (development/maintenance/etc of the automations) and the jobs displaced will be low skills jobs (freight hauling/taxis/stocking/cashier/food preparation). Without significant assistance to gain more skills, those displaced workers will be shit out of luck.

"a hacker could manually validate their usernames of interest by trying to sign up, then automate an attack on the sign in page." The fuck? He drops that like it's trivial. The whole point is not allowing to blast usernames until you find one that exists. You throttle EVERYTHING. Signups from an IP. Logins from an IP. Login attempts to a specific account. Everything has throttles. I think the author is seriously off on their reasoning.

It's not for this. And no, an SD card would be easy. Put it in your mouth, between your buttcheeks, taped to your skin, almost any way to get it through. Or just put it in your wallet with your phone. These scans are only searching for bombs/guns, and only have a 5% success rate. Theatre.

Actually, it's walking on thin ice. The right to assemble is guaranteed in the first amendment, and implicit in that is the right to travel. It can be argued, quite rationally, that travel by plane is part of that. I want to travel to Hawaii? Sure, you could take a boat and spend a week round trip in transit, but that's quite a penalty. And what stops a nefarious government from starting a "no public transit" list? And if they revoke your drivers license? Where do we draw the line? What if we're in a not-too-distant future where private ownership of cars is a thing of the past and you can be denied any travel that you can't walk to?

Localhost is my home. You DO NOT touch my home.

http://blog.sustainability.col... Pretty timely, and hopefully more people in the scientific sector will take this approach: winning the hearts and minds of the public isn't primarily a facts-driven task. It's one that has to take into account the origin of the fears and is as much a public relations issue as "THE SCIENCE SAYS ...". Even if the science does say :)

That's not accurate. They are selling you a service by a standard measure, and that should be an absolute measurement. When you buy gasoline, you are buying a fairly exact amount, and the pumps are regularly measured to ensure they're providing the stated amount. If the petrol station started using their own "proprietary" measurements? GTFOOT.

Half the apps are not removable without rooting. No, I don't want a Blockbuster app, Let's Golf 2(barbie?), NFL Mobile, Verizon's inferior Navigaor, or any of the other 8 apps you're forcing me to look at!

"Light can travel through a silk strand as easily as it does through a fiber optic cable. ..... it had about four orders of magnitude more loss than the glass." It couldn't even be self-consistent in the SUMMARY? *sigh* Someone's going to have a bad case of the Mondays.

No, this isn't what they get paid for - or we'd have gladiatorial, "to the death" type spectacles. And this affects HIGH SCHOOL students, not just paid athletes. Accidental risk vs systemic risk are two entirely different beasts.

[ this comment has been removed by the State of Arizona ]