Comment Sam Altman's response (Score 3, Funny) 32
"You don't really need to take pictures anyway - let our AI create any image you want!"
"You don't really need to take pictures anyway - let our AI create any image you want!"
I think they're arguing that they are the third thing, a message parlor.
Unions are a real-life strategy because they work. Divide-and-conquer is also a real-life strategy, because it works too.
Thus, I think the truth of your statement all depends on whether you look at this conflict between government and the the people, from the point of view of the attacker, vs the point of view of the defender.
Children do not have the maturity that is required for unfiltered access to the adult world
But they used to. In the 1980s, nobody dared to say in public, that 17-year-old me should not be allowed to visit public (or even university) (or even medical) libraries. (Or if someone did, they were still very obscure and unpopular, little more than a glimmer in the left's eye.)
If I may, could I narrow down which of these two things you think is best? First, there's exactly what you said above..
Kids have no right to use end-to-end encryption without parental consent
Kids have a right to use end-to-end encryption unless denied by a parent
Did I make it better, or did I make it worse?
I'm glad Rivian won, even though I'm unlikely to spend that kind of money on a car.
I've bought multiple cars over the past several decades. Buying cars from a dealership SUCKS. The only halfway-decent buying experience I've ever had was with CarMax.
... then that project is really can't be described as open source anymore.
Screw the solar-panel-deploying robots... it sounds like what we really need are Dyson-sphere-building robots!
This doesn't seem like particularly new tech, just a tweak on what the automotive industry has been using for several dacades. I'd also be curious if that "twice as fast" calculation takes into account the time necessary for setting up the necessary rails etc. required for the Maximo robots to operate.
I think what he meant to say, is that if Lewinsky had been a decade younger (12 instead of 22), then nothing would have happened.
This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
You don't get to pick and choose what people post (with some obvious exceptions like fraud or csam), while also claiming immunity for the stuff you couldn't or wouldn't.
Exactly, thanks for the excellent example. That's the kind of statement that nobody ever explains, but always presents as pure axiomatic dogma.
I do think that you might have revealed a clue in your unusual phrasing, though. You said "claiming immunity for the stuff you couldn't or wouldn't" but how can there ever be any possibility of liability there? If your computer denies someone else's request to publish something, what liability is there to be immune from?
Just reading that - "ChatGPT's Erotic Mode" - felt slimy and gross.
"Now this is a totally brain damaged algorithm. Gag me with a smurfette." -- P. Buhr, Computer Science 354