When creating art, there should be human involvement to at least some degree. There should be some effort; at least an attempt at some creativity.
If there's no human involvement in the work, then there's no creativity involved. And no, telling an AI to do something for you is not doing something yourself.
That seems reasonable.
I mean, technically he only got, like less then 80 million votes out of a total of 244 million eligible voters. So really, only 1/3 of eligible people that could vote supported him.
A lot of people don't vote at all and for some odd reason, a lot of Democrats stayed home last election because Harris garnered fewer votes then Biden by a decent margin. I would of thought the idea of a 2nd term would scared any registered Democrat to the poll to vote for ANYONE but him. I guess I was wrong. I don't know. I'm an independent that bounces between parties so I can vote in the primaries of the candidates I like best. I'm not your typical American voter with that behavior.
80 million is still baffling to me.
I was told about a Trump voter who, on hearing recently that a Minnesota lawmaker said that transgender-identifying minors need pornography for sex education, exclaimed that *this* was why they could never vote Democrat, and they felt that this reaffirmed their vote for Trump. Now, I can understand that a person of certain (quite reasonable) political persuations could be appalled with the stance of the Minnesota lawmaker. But I feel that if I was an American voter with those political persuations, Trump's lack of rectitude would appal me a great deal more, and the fact that the Minnesota lawmaker is a relatively minor figure in the scheme of things would also play a part in my overall evaluation. I don't think it is simply a matter of the different weight we put on different types of morality. From where I sit, Trump seem unashamed in his unscrupulousness. It's hardly comparable.
So my view of Americans as a fundamentally upright people (with exceptions, sure), who are kind and friendly, and principled, strains against that 80 million figure.
In my case, "what happened" was Donald Trump.
I'm not American but all of my life I gave the USA the benefit of the doubt in pretty much any situation. I assumed that the Americans generally meant well and if they intervened in something or said this thing was good and that thing is bad, they were generally on the side of the good guys.
Not everything they did worked out well, of course, but overall it was reasonable to assume that they were helping to keep the bad guys down and making the world a better and safer place than it would be without their influence.
Now, that's changed. And for the very first time ever, I've found myself not rooting for the USA in their current war.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not pulling for the Iranians either. But just like seeing two criminal gangs fighting each other, I look at this as being two baddies fighting each other so I'm not really invested in whoever wins either way. I'll just stay out of the way and let whoever wins pick up the pieces.
I think you have a good point. With previous US interventions, the administration would frame the action in terms of principles, and aim to gather international consensus. I just can't see that with Trump - he seems devoid of principles. But what baffles me is this: I still see Americans, in general, as a people who value principles, and doing the right thing, and I just can't understand how half of them could support him.
... now before I begin, where are my Meta AI Display Glasses...?
The ribbon format is just bad. There is no uniformity to the UI. You have to spend time learning the UI, rather than just using it.
This is definitely a situation where simpler is better, and it's very hard to beat the standard drop-down tree'd menu with modal dialogs at the leaves.
I tend to agree. It seems as if they took the menu options, which were all in a logical tree arrangement, shuffled them briefly, and scattered them on the top of the page.
That may be unfair - There may be fans of the ribbon interface who find it more useable. My perspective is that of a user who only occasionally uses the software and needs to look for functionality that I remember being there.
I'm not sure what triggered the development of the "ribbon" interface, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was an example of that phenomenon you get in large companies, where you have to keep changing things (Let's charitably call it "innovation") in order to demonstrate your worth. When an important new manager assumes a new post, they will never say "Things are going well as they are now". They will need to make drastic changes. This "need" has precious little relation to the current quality of product, or efficiency of operation.
User interface design can be focused on "power users", who know the software well, and are after efficiency, or focused on unfamiliar users, who want an intuitive interface, with a logical layout. Acieving the best of both requires a rare skill - one might almost call it an art. And I would suggest that the design of Unix was such an example. The idea of having simple commands that can be used together, and work on files... That allowed for the whole thing to be scaled up and out while maintaining that original design framework - keeping it familiar to longtime users. Every now and then I respectfully tip my hat to Thompson, Kernighan and Richie, et al.
Well, Siri is pretty good at setting alarms! Maybe AI could help it set even *more* alarms!
I suppose it would be, rather than "Siri - Set an alarm for 7am tomorrow", it would be "AI Siri - [Given what you know about my schedule, my commute time, where I am now, and how much sleep I need] Set an alarm for tomorrow".
Or perhaps AI Siri might even take the initiative to set an appropriate alarm for tomorrow if it considers it a good idea.
AI Siri: Good morning Fred. I have cancelled your first meeting this morning, having judged the other party to be untrustworthy, and have instead allowed you to sleep an hour longer for the good of your health.
As I recall, it was put into overload by a alien who was trying to kill someone or take out the ship. Don't recall. I think phasers were locked up except those used by security, the guys in red you did not want to be. They inevitably got written off(killed) if they had much time on screen.
Ah, ok. I wouldn't want to unfairly cast doubt on those in Starfleet responsible for starship safety.
Given the all battles and accidents the Enterprise encountered and survived during her voyages, they had extraordinary luck. Fretting about phaser safety is probably not appropriate.
I don't think I ever heard of Siri being used in a way that seemed useful to me.
It has been a voice assistant on an iPhone, to which you could, for example, dictate a message and have it sent - but you'd be anxious about the accuracy of the message, and about it being sent to the correct person.
I could imagine an "AI powered" Siri to which you could say "Buy me a mobile battery from a reputable maker at the cheapest price, so long as it arrives by Monday". I would imagine the AI powered Siri would be better at accuracy than the old Siri, but because the user would be entrusting it with more ambitious commands, the risks could be even greater... AI Siri: "Your anti aircraft missile batteries will arrive before noon on Monday. Your credit card has been charged."
In years past the cheaper versions like the SE were a lot cheaper, but these days the supply chain may have been disrupted due to AI taking up many components.
The 17e is just Apple's in-house budget(ish) option. Third parties presently get the iPhone 13 as their actual cheap iPhone. The weird thing is - they're not new old stock. If you buy one and check the production date, you'll see they're still actively manufacturing them.
That's interesting. But I would expect that the iPhone 13 would have an earlier end of support date than the 17e, right?
Many other airlines have already put this ban in. It is no big deal anymore as "most" airlines have USB or power outlets for charging now
I would generally take a mobile battery on a plane for use at the destination, not during the flight. As you say, planes will often have power outlets, and the internal battery will generally last the flight anyway.
If they are banning large power banks, then I wonder how a person with a genunine need for such a device, would be able to take it. e.g. I understand that one use of large power banks is on camping trips. So if you were planning a camping trip at the other end of your flight, but weren't permitted to take a large power bank either in the cabin, or in your checked luggage, would you have no choice but to buy or rent it at the destination?
Funny, you made me think of a star trek episode where I think a phaser is going overload and they toss it in some receptacle in the hallway on the ship. Big jolt but everything was fine.
The safety regulations on the Starship Enterprise were due a review. Having phasers at all on a starship is inviting trouble. But if the crew must have access to arms, then they should really be locked away, and only released when the crew needs them. The risk of phasers causing damage to the hull while the ship is somewhere in interstellar space should really have been taken more seriously.
And arguably, phasers that go into overload and subsequently explode suffer from a design issue.
There's a choice in Japan. You can go by road, rail, or air.
The trip from Tokyo to Osaka is about the boundary point - Shorter than that, the bullet train is faster, longer, the plane is faster.
You may also consider other factors - There is a bullet train every 10 minutes or so, and you are generally about to jump on the next one - but planes need to be booked in advance. Bullet trains are a bit more comfortable than planes. A plane can often be cheaper - they vary a bit, whereas the bullet train prices are comparatively constant.
I fear that we are not capable of taking action based on the results of scientific studies - even a scientific consensus. We are not convinced until it hits us directly, and even then we refuse to believe until it gets serious.
If this is true, then we'll take action when either:
(a) McDonalds takes the fillet o' fish off its menu, or
(b) we move into more enlightened political times
How do most people search through available podcasts? It’s not like there’s a general list like a tv guide. It’s all word of mouth or stumbling upon one during a YouTube recommendation. I feel like this is a major negative in podcast discovery and democratization of information.
I think you're right.
I use the Pocket Casts app, which does have several categories of recommendation: Trending, You Might Like, Award Winning, etc. But in my case, most of the podcast I listen to are the result of searching on a specific topic. For example I might search for history podcasts and be presented with a selection that I can then whittle down based on whether they appeal to me, and whether they have good reviews. Finally, I might pick out an episode or two and listen. If it passes that test I'll subscribe, possibly even catching up on past episodes.
If I had to recommend a handful of podcasts for anyone wanting nourishment for their mind (rather than "talk radio" junk food) the list would be:
* The Reith Lectures (BBC) - Annual series of lectures that have been given since 1948
* The Public Philosopher (BBC) - Harvard Professor Michael Sandel
* The Rest is History (Goal Hanger) - Topics from history covered with humour
* In Our Time (BBC) - Topics examined with guest academics.
* The Rest is Science (Goal Hanger) - Mathematician Prof Hannah Fry and Michael Stevens (Vsauce) talk about science.
Getting started with a list like this is more likely to result in quality recommendations from your podcast app.
"Truth never comes into the world but like a bastard, to the ignominy of him that brought her birth." -- Milton
