tomtimtall
You can. Nothing is stoping you. Just do it.
I won’t be surprised if they start convincing some third world counties that meat is bad and to eat their products making bank while causing widespread malnourishment in the process. It would not be the first time.
It’s kind of like if people argued that a bridge construction must be unsafe because they tried to make something similar in their kids sandbox and it fell apart when it got wet.
Apple doesn’t make and sell App Store. It makes and sells iPhones. And it’s not “genuinely better” and they do not dominate the market however it’s good enough that a lot of people are willing to pay a premium for that product.
The designer didn’t sit down and go “and logically when a circular belt is full, the items should stop moving while the belts keep moving”.
The fact that it was decided to not handle this edgecase does not mean it stops being a bug, no matter how much you love the game or how strongly you want your mantra of “factorial has no bugs” to be true.
Of cause factorial has bugs, lots of them. Just look at the thousands of fixes. This is one of them, and it’s a bug that has been there from the start and will likely never get fixed, but it’s still a bug.
Imagine if the same principles were used in other areas. You iPhone suddenly locking up after using Facebook to much because Facebook wasn’t paying Apple for access to its users.
If companies are producing just to get the lowest cost, it ends up being trash. Whenever anyone aims for sustainable products it’s obvious it will come at a higher price and quality becomes essential. That’s at least wha we see in all the sustainable products here
Like you get Elsa with different hair or the up grandpa in a suit.
Once you compare them to the closest examples from the training date it becomes a lot less impressive than the implied “this face is completely out of the imagination of a AI model” turns out the model just imagined someone in the training set with the hair of someone else. Quite boring.
Denmark does not have a culture of tipping, it’s rarely done, primarily in very fancy restaurants and no one would ever tip or expect anyone to tip in a McD.
Denmark is not communist. The state doesn’t mandate that you have to work for Mcdonalds and cannot work anywhere else. If a company doesn’t feel you are competent in a position then they can fire you, obviously. The minimum wage doesn’t mean they are obligated to pay anyone who wants to work for them, it simply means that anyone working in the position must have a wage at that point or above.
That makes no sense what so ever.
There is an obvious and straightforward way of getting those 12000 people to work again. There is no argument for firing them just because they are striking outside of petty displays of power and pure stupidity.
It doesn’t matter how great a nation you have, if US comes along and decides to put in place a dictator to secure low oil prices.
If US invaded Norway tomorrow and put a corrupt religious fundamentalist in power, there is absolutely no way you could blame it on the country, the religion or the color of the skin of he people living there.
Sure, but so what? India is not dependent on you personally maintaining a hydrogen infrastructure and this narrow-minded “there can be only one way” would not just have us staying on fossil fuels because “why maintain both gas AND electric?” It wouldn’t even have us providing both gas and diesel by the same argument.
So I’m curious if this was also seen outside of US? The root cause might not be social media itself, but just the fact that these apps allow amplification of unrelated damaging cultural aspects of youth as a female in the US.
Not fair by any account, but I think that’s what is likely to happen.
You trying to argue against fingerprinting, a identification practice so damn common that’s almost everyone currently has a device in their pocket using it, by saying “but what if they then adopt something completely unacceptable!!?” That’s not an argument against the simple known technology, it’s just an absurd slippery sloop argument where you pretend everything is one giant variation of similar actions an therefore nothing must ever change for fear that this could mean over negative changes could come.
Its odd that’s people have such an easy time having sympathy towards the mistreated, but immediately lose that sympathy once they realize that the affected make more a month than they do.
You’d have to be a recluse to think that overhyping in sales pitches is not normal.
This seems like your taking it a bit to the extreme. We both agree that for me to hire you to do a job I’m allowed to know who you are right? And that to identify the one person out of the world population I am allowed to keep a record with enough details that I can identify if a person is in fact you, right? Now if my bookeping of people changes from “roughly visually resembles the same person” which we both agree is a rubbish measure if any kind of security is involved to “has known fingerprint” and you refuse to comply, why then should I not be allowed to fire the person who I can no-longer identify out of the world population?
You have complete freedom to not want people to see your face or know your fingerprint, but you just cannot take away the freedom of a potential employer to be able to identify who you are by the means they decide.
Not getting through an education and being saddled with a heavy student debt without a well paying job is an extremely severe, extremely long lasting and quite horrible at times life destroying side effect of not doing everything the two people next to you the first day of class are to get by. Also it’s much more likely if you ascribe to the typical “look to your left, look to your right” speech.
I think it’s unfair putting the blame on the individual when objectively looking at the two alternatives presented to them has the one you want them not to follow being the objectively better. It’s like arguing that Arnold Schwarzenegger never should have done steroids.
I got through my studies without any drugs, but had you offered the opportunity to those in my starting class who flunked out, one now homeless and struggling with alcoholism incapable, I am certain they would chose it. And had you that first day given me the opportunity, I likely would have taken it just to reduce risk.
That said the system could be changed and laws written to prevent subsidies all together. Then competition for large workforces would be based on other factors.
Or a construction worker saying “I don’t know how the Trump tower cost so much, it’s windows all over and I could put up a window much much cheaper.”
Even if they too just copy pasted open source code and tweaked until they got semi ok results, that still leaves 98% of the actual project to be done. (they likely didn’t though). And why you ask not just copy the code and get it done easily? Well if you are spending millions on all the other fases of the project in the first place, why not increase the budget available for development and have an actual robust solution that integrates with existing systems and lives up to the tons if user requirements and specifications they likely started out with.