Titanfall 2 still is amazing. it still stands up, even today, to all us wanna be mech warriors out there. I'm not sure how much it would cost to "remaster" it to the latest game engines and platforms, but if they're not going to do that, it might be a killer way to bring it back to the masses... 10 years later.

Till we have our Y2K moment... That they plead all us old guys to come back and debug their AI code.

In terms from XKCD, It's definitely a way to see it. Although as the world evolves, we as a society collectively view these places to be the new town square.

https://about.fb.com/news/2019...

Well is it, or isn't it? I don't know how to think of it other than false advertising. You're providing your data and in turn not receiving the services that you in turn traded for.

Can we also think of it instead of destroying them, that they were mashing them together? As soon as I saw the crusher, they're probably saying that this thing does all these things, which pretty much the previous iPad did too.

An unpopular way to look at it, but aren't there any pros to rising CO2 emissions (I understand the Cons) but isn't another affect is higher crop yields, higher plant growth (possibly in the rainforests), NASA published an article that basically said it's making the earth greener for now.

From the article:

Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.

While rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the air can be beneficial for plants, it is also the chief culprit of climate change. The gas, which traps heat in Earth’s atmosphere, has been increasing since the industrial age due to the burning of oil, gas, coal and wood for energy and is continuing to reach concentrations not seen in at least 500,000 years. The impacts of climate change include global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and sea ice as well as more severe weather events.

Which right? Do you mean the right to manufacture or sell alcohol? Because drinking it was still legal (if you were considering that the right.)

"On January 17, 1920, 100 years ago, America officially went dry. Prohibition, embodied in the US Constitution's 18th Amendment, banned the sale, manufacture, and transportation of alcohol. Yet it remained legal to drink, and alcohol was widely available throughout Prohibition, which ended in 1933."

https://www.bu.edu/articles/20....

Freaking semantics, am I right?

I don't think the tool's a joke and or practically useless. I think there's quite a few things that it can help with certain mundane tasks, and by the way forget that it's in beta, it's also the first version of this project. The applications of GPT-3 in general (which I'm pretty positive GH CoPilot) can assist with all sorts of things, is the results perfect, far from it. However as of right now as a code completion tool it's just astonishing, that it does feel good enough to be like a junior programmer sitting and paired up with you.

Just how it predicts comments, and assists in documentation has been incredible. Outputting interfaces, or general programming tasks it's pretty spot on. General functions like sorting or other things like that you really don't need to think about. It understands your interfaces / protocols / etc.

I think the issue we should be discussing is with the in-question GPL code, how truly unique is it? Do we have an example of a line that CoPilot produced unmistakably coming from a particular project that is purely unique to that?

So we should remove all choices/liberties where it is inefficient? Or just the ones that are perceived to benefit the average / majority? But i think this argument is not how the line is form but who gets to stand in line. At some point, what if your thinking doesn't align with the norm? Well I guess you'll have no other choice but to get in line.

i understand the argument you are making, unfortunately social media is in a category that is totally different than bakeries. Therefore there are different variables to the equation that we must consider. how much of a sway does what you read have on your view on a topic? how do you consume much of those news and opinions? even if the answer is close to zero, ask yourself about other people.

this is a free speech issue, not a freedom of religion issue (which is usually the reasons cited for denying cakes to a couple lovebirds )

Social Media's reach is too powerful, it is used as a public forum, and almost needs to be regulated as such. The slippery slope is when people start banning points of view who will be there to defend you when someone doesn't like your message?

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

... youâ(TM)ve exceeded your posts for the month, or viewed your timeline for the 3rd time. Please try Platinum which gives you the ability to Post / Browse Timeline / Like.

There's a 20 factor test, I don't know how current it is, but one of the stipulations inside of it is:

The extent to which services performed by the worker are a key aspect of the regular business of the company. If a worker provides services that are a key aspect of the company's regular business activity, it is more likely that the company will have the right to direct and control his or her activities. For example, if a law firm hires an attorney, it is likely that it will present the attorney's work as its own and would have the right to control or direct that work. This would indicate an employer-employee relationship.

Now in the case of Uber, driving someone to their destination to me seems like a major part of Uber's business.

But what if the proper cost of that pill actually is $100? (Or, for that matter, $1,000,000) Are you and I, by sole virtue of being citizens entitled to that life saving pill, regardless of the cost?

This is a struggle for me. It seems reasonable to me that there should be access to basic medical care for all citizens with as little standing in the way of this care as possible. No one should die from Dysentery in the United States. On the other hand, if Pyro_Peter's Nuclear Anti-cancer Medicines, Inc. spends $10,000 to make each Fermium Armed Genetically Tailored Smart Bomb Anti-Cancer Pill then I completely understand that if we want more FAGTSBAC Pills (*whew* that was close to being a really baaaad acronym) then Pyro_Peter's Nuke Pills, Inc. must charge more than $10,000 for that pill.

I think the tough part here is that the line for "reasonable access to basic care" is in different places for different societies. I'd also be concerned that the act of drawing that line would be sufficient force to prevent it from naturally rising with time. What if that line was drawn in the 1920's US? Where would medicine be today? Would we have some metric like the Consumer Price Index but for medical care to keep moving that line up?

Finally, and I know this is diverging from the actual topic of this thread, it is clear to me that your right to health care is a different sort of right than your right to free speech or your right to be free from unreasonable searches. No one else has to do anything for you to speak or for you to not be searched. Health care is different. Someone else has to do something for you to have a right to health care. What if they don't want to? Can you (or a government agent working on your behalf) compel someone else to provide you care?

It is a complex issue and the more closely I look at it the more complex it seems to get.

Peter

*sigh*
There's plenty of powered furniture available, and has been for decades. Those crazy "As Seen On TV" powered folding beds have been around for ages. My new couch has push button electric recliners. Most cars today have powered seats; many of those electrically heated.
The problem I'd have with furniture based power supplies is similar to the problem I have with built in electronics and adapters in vehicles. The lifetime of my furniture and vehicles greatly exceeds the probable lifetime of any consumer electronics power adapter installed in it. I used to work at a high end auto dealership. I installed dozens of iPod adapters (at around $400 a shot. Insanity!) and all of those adapters are worthless to the new generation of i devices that these customers are likely to have. Some of my customers had older vehicles with build in analog cell phones which are now junk that just rides around with them.
Furniture is even worse. Decent furniture should last a lifetime. By putting a consumer electronics power port into a piece of furniture you're basically admitting that it's going to be trash in less than 10 years.
Peter

That's largely how I feel. Maybe next time I'll just nod and smile and see what happens.