Oh no, those subtleties aren’t lost on me, I’m just lamenting that literally anyone is falling for this scheme. Even if this would be technically unenforceable it’s still 1000% bad and should never even be in congress. I hate that every few years some draconian bullshit like this pops up and we need to muster all of our collective will to raise awareness and fight it. Someone else said it best in the thread - we need to win every time, but they only need to win once.
Does me tapping my order into a self-service kiosk at a restaurant count as “using” the operating system that it is running on?
Like, I feel like this is going to be really difficult to enforce, and big business might actually push back against it if they think it will hurt their bottom line, but my god can we stop with this nanny state internet surveillance bullshit already? The government is too stupid to actually protect anyone with this dumb law because there will always be loopholes and workarounds.
It’s real, but 1000% staged. No way secret service would have let an unvetted Doordash driver approach the front door of the White House, let alone meet the President in person. It’s a publicity stunt.
Despite this, some people still believe it’s an organic moment, as if any Doordash driver would be comfortable just standing there as a political prop for two hours instead of running more deliveries.
Heh, I was also banned for the same reason as you - quoting the exact text of the constitution to say what should happen to insurrectionists. My appeal was denied in seconds.
The time before that it was during the presidential debate live watch threads, and there was a portion of the broadcast where the camera dipped away from the speaker, so I wrote “kill the cameraman!”, an obviously non-serious statement in reference to the subreddit /r/killthecameraman, and got banned for that. That was only a three week suspension I think. The mod who banned me also handled my appeal as well, promptly ignored.
“build fast, ship fast”
Ugh… these people are going to be the death of us.
Who wrote this shit
Bruh, were you not paying attention to the name HIDEO KOJIMA appearing on your screen at the start and end of every single mission? He really wanted you to know it was his idea.
I do this every time I see one of those dorks driving one around.
Slippery Slope Fallacy. It’s the same thing as saying Doom and Grand Theft Auto train school shooters, or marijuana is a gateway drug to hard substances.
This is not me defending paedophiles, I’m just pointing out the flaw in the logic here. Nothing says that having access to these dolls increases the likelihood of them carrying out their desires on a real child, or that by not having access they would never take that step regardless.
Are you telling me my virtual real estate is worthless?!
In a couple of years, the bubble may have already burst.
Also, the robot is not just an employee, it’s an asset that can be sold off to pay debts in the event of bankruptcy.
Seems like, based on his own words, that gamers were absolutely right about DLSS 5. At least as far as I can tell.
We don’t want GenAI horseshit in games.
Nintendo alleges that they plagiarized their assets.
The thing is, there was a solid argument to be made that some of the meshes for certain Pals were too similar to that of some Pokémon models to be a coincidence, but Nintendo didn’t bring any of that up in the lawsuit. They opted to go for the much more flimsy “riding a character” and “summoning a character by throwing a ball/sphere”.
I had an idea pop in my head and I don’t know if it’s feasible or not, but maybe the next nascent social media network can try it out, who knows.
Private trackers for torrenting are notoriously hard to get invitations to, specifically because the only way to get in is through joining the community early, limited time windows to register, or some sort of lottery system, but most people get in when one of their friends sends them one of their limited number of invitations - which they don’t do lightly because if you invite a leecher it harms your reputation and both you and the person you invited can get banned even if you are still maintaining a positive ratio.
So what if we implemented a similar kind of system? Bots can’t flood a system if the registration is closed access, but regular people can still get invitations from friends and family. But if you invite a bot, that bot account and the account that invited it get terminated simultaneously, taking out two bad actors for the price of just one. Heck, if you really wanted to go scorched earth, every account that was registered via an invitation from the person who initial invited the bot should also get terminated. Know who you are inviting and you won’t have any problems, but if you use your ability to invite people recklessly, your entire social network gets kicked off the platform.
This would probably never get implemented in a serious social media platform because those spaces rely on explosive growth to compete with other more established networks, and limiting the number of users is counterproductive - I think at some point investors would just start telling management to open the floodgates and let the bots in already.
AI wasn’t the NFT killer, right click > saveas killed it at the very moment of conception.
Digital scarcity is a complete joke.
They don’t just want the machines to create the art and music for us, they want them to consume it for us too, so that we’ll have more time to slave away at our jobs.
Violates the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and therefore not legal, but when has that ever stopped this fucking braindead administration?
These are the people who are about to win the console wars once Microsoft throws in the towel with Xbox.
PC gaming hopefully about to have a third golden age soon! 🤞
Yeah, because the AI will look at everything with cold logic and rationality and come to the conclusion that even though the best chance of survival is for everyone to keep their fingers off the button, all it takes is for one actor to do it for the whole system of mutually assured destruction to collapse into nuclear armageddon, in which case the best chance of survival is to be the first one to launch your nukes and take out all your enemies capabilities to retaliate.
A human being who isn’t psychotic can clearly see that the resulting survival and new world order would not be particularly a pleasant one to live in. The AI doesn’t care about its own comfort, though, so it will see this as the best outcome that minimizes variables.
This is why AI should never be allowed to make decisions.
True investigative journalism is finding out if bears shit in the woods. Details at 11:00.