I think it's even more interesting, in that one or two humans have to decide whether to question a call, and they have to identify calls that were wrong, not just ones they want to overturn, and they don't have a great angle to figure out what the algorithm would do. I think it's going to be fun to see batters try to do the ump's job, while standing to the side and considering swinging at the pitch.
Another Canadian dunce who's drank the warm cup of PP
That has not been my experience, at all. I'm entirely against the concept of what they're doing (giving me a reason not to visit the websites that ultimately pay for the production and publication of information) but the AI summaries and links to related articles tend to be spot on what I'm looking for. Perhaps you can give me a (non-contrived) search to try that demonstrates your claim?
Texas and Florida prohibit local governments from mandating rest and water breaks.
The issue with health concerns like this is that it's not like it explodes and kills you - there's really no way to say, "It was the molecule on March 13, 2026 that started cancer in your body"
You can't even do that with cigarettes - you can only make a conclusion on cause that's well supported by circumstantial evidence.
And I'm not saying you're arguing against it, but just broadly speaking
I think the real issue is warm parts of China selling to cold parts of India without including the features that aren't needed near the factory. We know lots about battery chemistry, but rural farmers have had more immediately relevant things to know about up to now and don't have a good source of information on this new thing the government is pushing, so they skip things that sound like luxuries and end up with something inappropriate for their purpose.
Plus, brains don't process colors! They process light waves. Color doesn't exist in the outside world, light waves do. Color is a relation between the world and a brain.
These kinds of brain studies are common and they suffer from a subtle problem. When you train an ML model on brain activity from 15 people, the classifier works for those 15 people. It usually does not generalize. Train the model on a different set of 15 people and get different results. Yet the researchers make claims that they've found the elusive brain signature for color or whatever they're looking for. This approach reflects a basic misunderstanding of machine learning.
The irony of your sarcasm is it actually *is* horrible.
Water is good - necessary even - but too much water will kill you. Choice is the exact same way - it's entirely possible to have too much of it, as much as that contradicts an ethos buried deeply in the American id.
Lol, so many of the posts here reek of bitter developers who have clearly never worked in the halls of quality software engineering
yeah well, everything sounds simple to people who don't quite understand the nature of the actual problem, but here's a hint:
The next day after your "simple solution": "FTC sues Google claiming that it is identifying their non-political party emails as political party emails"
"It's as if the people reporting the news don't care about being consistent"
That's just an astoundingly stupid thing to say. I don't even know where to begin with that.
Why wouldn't you just turn OneDrive off? I mean, I get it, stubborn master of your computer stuff, but honestly, you're just making shit difficult for yourself. Just turn it off.
"Usually to my desktop."
Oh my.
It's adorable you seem to think the experience of home/prosumer users is that of enterprise deployments/users.
Documentation is like sex: when it is good, it is very, very good; and when it is bad, it is better than nothing. -- Dick Brandon
