Capability machines and tagged architectures have an interesting history. The first I know of is the Burroughs 6600 from the mid to late '60s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Then there's the Intel 432 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and the short-lived BiiN system that was a successor to the 432: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... But a lot of this dates back (like so much of computing) to Multics and its mandatory access control mechanisms.

We have a 7 segment AC powered alarm clock by Panasonic from about 1980. It still works, but the labels on the buttons have worn off, and we have to make sure we know which button to push to set clock time vs alarm time. It's the oldest still working vintage technology in the house. There are some Panasonic stereo components in the attic from about the same time, but those need to go to recycling.

Huh. Have you checked out parking in Madrid? We were once triple-parked when it was time to leave our hotel. But Madrileño are used to it, you just honk the horn and people come out of the bars and move their cars.

That's as good an explanation as any, and since "hallucinations" in AI are acceptable to a lot of people on the AI Hype Bubble, it relieves Microsoft of the responsibility for this.

Is that anything like "cryptozoology?" Cryptozoology is a pseudoscience and subculture that searches for and studies unknown, legendary, or extinct animals whose present existence is disputed or unsubstantiated, particularly those popular in folklore, such as Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, Yeti, the chupacabra, the Jersey Devil, or the Mokele-mbembe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Scholars have noted that the subculture rejected mainstream approaches from an early date, and that adherents often express hostility to mainstream science. Scholars studying cryptozoologists and their influence (including cryptozoology's association with Young Earth creationism) noted parallels in cryptozoology and other pseudosciences such as ghost hunting and ufology, and highlighted uncritical media propagation of cryptozoologist claims. So it sure looks like it.

I looked through the paper, and frankly I couldn't tell. But I'm not an AI/translation person, so I might have missed something.

But I do note their example is English Croatian. So that just reinforces my question about translation between two arbitrary European languages.

I wonder if they're doing direct from say, French to German or Spanish to Polish, or using English as an intermediate representation. And, of course, there's always the idempotent test (translate from A to B, then send the result to B to A translation.)

dave

And why would you ever accept such an App on your device?

I dunno about Android, but on iOS there's a means to control whether an app has access to location data from the phone. I usually say "no."

But that is clearly different from location generated by Telcos from cell tower data. That data is under control of the Telco, not the handset. The Telco, or agents using that Telco data, must have explicit consent, as required by the law, to use location data from cell towers.

Suggest reading the decision: https://media.cadc.uscourts.go... It's pretty easy to follow, and it makes clear how the Court established what the law required telecom companies to do. IANAL, but I'd summarize the Court's summary as "Customer location data, whether or not they are actively on a call, is covered by this law. Therefore telcos, and companies they provide location data to, must have consent. There are a few exceptions where location can be provided without prior consent, particularly for emergency services/911 calls." The problem here was not directly T-Mobile/Sprint conduct, but rather conduct by companies that bought data from T-Mobile/Sprint. Some of those companies violated their contracts on allowable use. The FCC held that T-Mobile/Sprint failed to adequately monitor the terms of the contract to make sure the other companies were actually doing what they promised. That was particularly egregious failure after the bad practices by subcontractors were revealed in the press. So this was a 'failure to supervise/audit the terms of the contract'.

Barcelona could look at using the effluent pumped from those massive cruise ships that invade the city. That would go a little way towards balancing the impact of those ships. I've been in Barcelona and Venice when a cruise ship pulls in and dumps thousands of passengers into the downtown area. It's not pretty, and that's before considering the bad behavior I've seen from some of those passengers.

The existing contracts had to meet a formal set of requirements. Will the new commercial software be held to those same requirements? Or will they just ignore anything that is actually difficult? That's a pattern I saw from Palantir, where they lobbied Congress really hard to overturn a contract, but when evaluated against that contract's requirements, they replied "Oh, some of those are really hard and expensive, so we shouldn't be forced to do those."

Sure, sometimes those requirements make no sense, or at least have questionable cost/benefit. But if you don't want to meet the requirements, why are you bidding on the contract?

Of course, all those books Google digitized are now behind Google's login.

I'm buying a pickup to move stuff, not people. Maverick and Ranger don't have a 2-door configuration.

To quote my late brother the carpenter, "If you can't easily haul a bunch of 4x8 sheets of plywood or drywall, it's not a truck, it's a toy."

Nakasone also called ransomware "among the great scourges that we have in our country," stating the U.S. is "not making progress against ransomware."

Well, when it comes to ransomware, not all platforms are created equal. https://cybernews.com/security... But for TOO MANY people, Microsoft's software/security failures are America's failures. And this will continue until Microsoft, and other software vendors (including Apple) become legally liable for the security faults in their software.