So what?

Do you honestly think that it is going to be faster to

- Call 911
- Get an EMS vehicle dispatched
- Send it to them .. then to just go directly to EMS?

If you do, I think you need to rethink that process. Or, you have never before called 911.

Also, FYI, despite what you may think, ambulances DO have to follow the speed limit.

This whole process seems very dumb and not thought through.

If someone is not responsive in the back of a vehicle when the ride ends. the vehicle should just BE DRIVEN TO THE NEAREST EMS LOCATION, either the fire department or hospital. Calling the city EMS and wasting their time is nonsensical when the person IS IN A VEHICLE THAT DRIVES ITSELF ALREADY.

Then, if they get to the EMS and it turns out the person is just asleep, then charge them a few hundred dollars and reimburse the city.

I am deep in the AI space

And I can tell you, the number of companies that have deployed AI to production well, to any kind of degree, are very slim.

The problem isn't the technology. Its that most companies are staffed and run by incompetants, and are unable to change at the pace needed to get benefit from AI

The disruption caused by AI is going to be felt as existing Fortune 1000 companies all start being disrupted by other companies with half of the operating expenses.

A

"CD sales still increased 6.7% year over year, even if the whole genre was removed from the equation, jumping 16% to 16.3 million units."

That's gotta be money laundering. CD sales have decreased an average of 12% per year, for the past quarter century.

N/T

Well, yes. For many years, presidential candidates, both Democratic and Republican, referred to the United States as "the indispensible nation". And my reaction was always, "Doesn't that mean the US is a single point of failure for civilization?"

We are currently performing an experiment which addresses this question: can the US enjoy the benefits of soft power without the cost? That's the whole point of obeying *norms*. No individual force is going to punish you if you are treacherous, mercurial, foul-mouthed, disrespectful and generally unpredictable. Everyone will punish you.

I think an inevitable cost of this experiment will be that the world will decide that the US can't be a single point of failure for global democracy any longer. In many ways, that's something that will be good for us. But it's also going to cost us in painful ways. When the world decides to move away from the dollar as the international reserve currency, you will see both inflation and higher interest rates on everything from credit cards to mortgages, to business loans that will offset the export advantages. We will need *more* business investment to shift the economy to producing low value goods again, so the transition will be rocky.

Copy protection on the original sleeping beauty is long expired.
Copy protection on the Disney version is good for years yet.

In the original versions, the scene i quoted? There is no scene like that in the original version. But it is beat for beat straight from the Disney version. If you want to tell a sleeping beauty story, you absolutely can, the original source material not copy protected, you can faithfully tell that story, including the unconscious rape of the princess to impregnate her so that she finally wakes up at child birth... or you can create more family friendly version all your own with whatever you like. But you can't simply lift a bunch of scenes that only exist in the copy protected Disney version and call it your own original interpretation by changing a few details.

The chatgpt story is a ripoff of the Disney version though.

The scene I quoted with the three "magical gaurdians" bestowing three gifts at a celebration crashed by the sorcerous who places the curse -- that is not from the original source material, its not novel either, its a scene ripped straight from the Disney version. And its not an isolated issue with the AI version.

There is no question that Disney doesn't "own" sleeping beauty, but they do own their telling of it. This was an obvious ripoff of that particular telling in several places.

If a child handed in the Moonlit Princess the teacher would give them a lecture about plagiarism. Because its not remotely original enough. It is so clearly taking so many things straight from Disney's version. Sure the names are changed, and the words "aren't the same", but its far too derivative of that particular version to credibly claim its an original telling of the sleeping beauty story.

"No. It is not copyright infringement"

Go ahead, prompt for that story and publish your own 'moonlit princess". It is not a court case you'd win; the details taken from the Disney version are beyond excessive.

" and there's no reason to hold copyright so sacred anyway. Are you seriously wanting to protect hundred year old fairy tails from being retold?"

That's an entirely separate discussion. Legally it is infringement. Whether it should be is completely separate question, or how long it should be are separate questions.

FWIW, I don't agree with copyright being 100 years.

Who is they? And what database are you referring to?

Dictionaries often contain quotes from original source material, or references to where it was first used, or first used a certain way.

Dictionary publishers have never been accused of downloading massive torrents of pirated copies of books and processing them.

Google on the other hand HAS been accused of that, and the decade of litigation related to that ultimately rules that the limited things google was doing with it was fair use. The dictionary companies are likely paying for enhanced access to that google data now.

The AI companies are singing the same fair use tune, but its really quite different. Google was doing it (at the time) to allow for search so you could enter phrase or quote and find the book it was from and the page it was on, and to collect other meta data - word count, word frequency, analyze sentence complexity, etc... all factual information.

AI companies are using the content of that digitized corpus and everything else they can get their hands on to generate new content, much of which non-factual in nature, and often very arguably explicitly creatively derivative.

prompt: "Make a story like sleeping beauty" ... 2 seconds later we have "The Moonlit Princess" and we'll just self-publish that on Amazon... boom I'm an author!

You seriously telling me this is NOT copyright infringement? Even if you wanted to argue that sleeping beauty is a classic fairytale from the 17th century and not under copyright, the prose above is a pretty blatant Disney ripoff.

Ironically, with the current state of affairs and AI slop everywhere.. I am finding more and more than the curated feed of personal connections I get on Facebook is much more aligned with what I want to be doing on social media. I am spending more time there again.

Yes, I intentionally don't go to work because I'm too busy going to the Illegal Immigrant Volunteer Slaughterhouse. This means I don't have the money to feed my family or fuck hot chicks. It's a sacrifice we all have to make for the future of our children, though!

Man, they really need to pass a law or something to make it affordable to have healthcare in this country, man. Someone should run on that premise. It's something long past having not been tried.

How do you think those immigrants get those skills in other countries? Are they randomly birthed with them, perhaps assigned them? Bequeathed, like a royal bloodline?

Are you retarded?

No. There are 3 ways they get them, the same as in the US:
1) earn them
2) buy them
3) fake them

At the very least, they had to have the forethought to acquire them in piece or in farce before applying for the job, unless you're suggesting a very large percentage of India appears to have precognition as well as having a disproportionately high rate of supposed idiot savants/high functioning autists (and that 'functioning' is doing a lot of work).