dfxm12
dfxm12 on Hacker News
I don't know why but the very specific episodes of when he buys a convertible and when he gets his friend to break his video game addiction still live rent free in my head. I can't remember anything else about the series.
A baby does not "adopt" their name, though. It is given to them.
I'm just going by the article, which has data for both names. If you think it is wrong, take it up with them :)
Interestingly enough, Lindsey, like Lindsey Buckingham, the guitarist of Fleetwood Mac, became a more popular girl's name during Fleetwood Mac's heyday.
I think historic context provides enough clarity for readers of the website of the
imperial war museum.
I also think the headline as is would be good enough even for people who might not have learned about ww2 yet. A headline is not meant to be a complete summary after all...
The situation as provided is missing too many details for anyone to make a meaningful judgement call, but remember, more than one party can be found liable/guilty (maybe of different things) in a situation. Overall, the law usually protects people who are acting reasonably, but does not protect people who act negligently.
I'm not a lawyer, but I imagine there's not a lot of precedent or law around this, so it'll be up to the court to decide on the finer details until we do have meaningful laws/regs. Anthropic will probably have better lawyers than the user.
This is why it's important to get ahead of issues like this, and anthropic should not be involved in discussions around regulating itself...
I don't know if that analogy holds. You don't
normally blame Toyota for car crashes, but the driver. If you must use a car analogy, consider the 2010 Toyota recalls rather than just normal car crashes.
That is to say, anthropic should be considered responsible, not (or not just) the users.
In the US, we've already seen the decrease in funding for education & research and closing borders down to many foreign researchers. The current admin and mainstream media is science-skeptic. We're already heading for a dark age. AI's contribution is largely because those policies are coupled with the same admin putting all their eggs into the AI basket, and likewise, basically all the major players in AI being on board with the admin's policies. This should be considered a systemic issue. Things like having a "healthy scientific skepticism and the limits of LLMs’ creativity" are important, but won't solve this alone.
AI chatbots contributing to or reinforcing suicidal ideation.
This isn't generic, it's the same thing. Why would you expect the same thing? There are limitless ways to picture a bird on a bike. White pelican? Brown pelican? Wings out for balance? Wings anthropomorphized into hands on handle bars? Bmx bike? Mountain bike? Riding towards you, away from you, on a race course, etc.
Do a Google image search for pelican, you get a diverse set of sub species of pelicans and different poses and angles for them. Go on a writing prompt forum, you get many diverse ideas from the same simple prompt. Hell, ask your friends at a dinner party to describe a pelican riding a bike and see what happens.
Now, there are a lot of images of bikes from that side angle facing right on the web. Why? Because that's how they're staged on e-commerce websites. Does this say something about AI?
Constant surveillance has become the default order of things. Doing what's best for corporations is the default order of things. On the flip side, "think of the children" is a strong appeal to lawmakers and has won this round. Us adults still have to suffer under the thumb of big business though.
How did you come to learn the original source in the case of the wheels? Can this be applied to other products?
Yeah, the tweet reads more like an ad then a news report.
To monitor when something like this happens...
99% of the game is concerned with [Mario's movement]. most of Miyamoto’s time is spent on that, and the movement of the camera.I had to put down too many early 3D action games because of clunky controls and not being able to see what was going on. Maybe horror games (like resident evil) could get away with awkward cameras in the service of jump scares, but it's frustrating when you have to make a jump and the camera, and thus the controls, don't cooperate with you.
TIL The Onion goes back to at least 1988.
Anyway, I'm a big fan of what their new(ish) management has been doing, especially with infowars. I hope they can get the issues they're looking for.
But where is the line exactly?This is what courts are for. There is no exact line because many situations are different.
Surely you don't have to have a big red cancel button on every page of your platform
Why not?
Some examples would be helpful
The text you quoted is clear enough to me, and it's probably clear to any reasonable person (most rules are written this way). If you're worried about gaming the system to find the exact process that just on the "legal" side of things, you probably aren't reasonable.
Fwiw, every municipality I've lived in has had some kind of program to help people who own and live in their house to afford property tax if they can't.
I think they're usually called "homestead exemption" or something like that.
Most of Beat Takeshi's work is amazing, from this, to his films, even his infamous Nintendo game.
Of course. These things are cyclical. Some might remember the f plan diet or similar.
Now if you're paying full price for a game you've at least had the ability to read reviews and you know it's going to be half price in a year but you want it now.This was true back then too. Computer Gaming World dates back to 81. Also the software stores that I (i.e., my parents) shopped at back then discounted older titles. This is why I got to play through the Castle of Dr. Brain after the Island of Dr. Brain was released.
Many laws constricting police activity and related to data collected by police go ignored.
Don't discount that these guys might be true believers.
It's a big cult and you ain't in it.
I've noticed it has another benefit of giving the administration an out when they get hard questions about AI. They can huff and puff about calling it SI instead of answering the question.
You're at best naive if you don't see the big picture of sum of the immigration policies of this administration.
I think it's worth giving the author some benefit of the doubt that he knows his audience and is not speaking to the entire world, including future generations, all at once.
It's also obvious given the context of the very next sentence that he doesn't mean this as literally as you've interpreted.
It sounds like a Flash intro for a website...