If a trans kid calls the suicide hotline and the volunteer suggests they stop wearing dresses to school so people won't bully them, I'm pretty sure the outcome will be far worse than anyone intended. There should be specialists who know how to handle specific kinds of callers.
I wonder if this will lead to a sort of "open sourcing" of music, where the reputation of what one produces will be improved by releasing the raw DAW files/tracks/etc. Even if AI is used to generate the constituent parts of a manually-assembled track, it would still demonstrate to listeners that there was significant human involvement in the process.
Touring, merch, etc will also serve as good "proof of give-a-shit".
That would be neat, but I really don't see it happening.
In software-land, it's my sense that, if anything, AI is working against open source. AI is creating busy work for open source maintainers with a large volume of low quality PRs, and scrapers are burdening those who maintain their own small-scale, public facing infrastructure.
Meanwhile, AI is ingesting their publicly available data to improve itself, with the implicit (if not explicit) goal of making those projects irrelevant (why read the docs, participate in a forum or chat, or submit a PR when you can ask your AI thing to just write the code you want instead?).
Furthermore, if a software developer is of the opinion that AI is "bad" in some way and they want to resist it, I think it would make the most sense to keep their code private. Open source is feeding AI.
It's a real shame that so much of the "payload operations" had to be directly integrated into the shuttle code for launch. Given that so many missions were DoD missions the code apparently became contaminated to the point that it is almost certain it will never be released.
Which is a pity because near the end of the program it was quite an advanced software management and deployment stack:
An interesting example is at the beginning of the program they had no ability to update the orbiter once it was in launch configuration. Which made every launch particularly sensitive to the weather, not just on the ground, but well above the ground where jet stream and other wind patterns have significant effect on the ascent profile.
As the program advanced they eventually gained this ability and could integrate gathered weather data into new variable values which could be pushed into the orbiter on the day of launch. This significantly increased the margin of weather conditions they could launch in.
Only when the prices raise to the point that low demand leads to actual flight cancellations. The demand for fuel is much less flexible than the demand for tickets.
On the N64, an equirectangular viewer a la QT3D or the current street view is not precisely a wonder.. m68k's could do that at a similar resolution. It's simple 3D in the end.
For the rest, yes, it's really astounding until you push these polygons while moving around in a game loop...
This occurred in Florida. This is but one isolated incident, yet, I can't help but notice the two examples that come to mind (this and Christopher Duntsch) both occurred in states with leadership that champion deregulation. Even if deregulation was the ultimate culprit, it seems inexcusable to me that academic/medical institutions aren't self-regulating effectively despite that.
I'm sure I and many other concerned patients and potential-patients are asking; how does something like this even occur? What institutional failures in medicine led to two grossly negligent and incompetent surgeons being given the controls to peoples' lives? What safeguards were neglected at the academic and organisational layers, and what are we doing so that this does not occur again? If institutions are doing their job, no case like this should ever get to the point where a prosecutor needs to stop and clean things up, much less to the first maiming of a patient.
Texas has laws that limit medical malpractice suit judgement amounts. This is because it's a common talking point among the very ignorant in the US that healthcare is expensive because of "Bullshit lawsuits and medical malpractice insurance and that mcdonalds coffee lady".
Texas still doesn't have radically or meaningfully cheaper healthcare than places who have not implemented that scheme.
Also nice to see Greg Abbot personally intervening in the lawsuits (as AG) to ensure that justice was not served.
>Prediction markets don't have any "natural" reason like that for excluding insider trading. It's just "game designers" crying their hearts out when someone ruins their game by having an advantage.
I can think of a few very good reasons you would want to prohibit insider trading on prediction markets. Betting on war outcomes; being incentivised to commit war crimes or throw vital operational goals for financial gain. Wagering on public figures' jobs; being incentivised to harm them.
CFTC's guidelines around prediction markets specifically call out war outcomes.
"As a general matter, DCMs are reminded that section 5c(c)(5)(C) of the CEA provides that the Commission may determine that an event contract is contrary to the public interest if the contract involves, among other things, assassination, war, or terrorism."
This goes missed a lot in debates about conscription. The Iran war in the US and the Ukraine war in Russia enjoy very little popular support among military aged men. This is in stark contrast to WW2, and even in Vietnam there was still a strain of thinking of draft resisters as cowards. But wars in this day and age enjoy a shockingly tiny public mandate, and it's entirely possible that governments can only do a draft on paper. Putin is practically unable to push further mobilisation because the first round provoked such stiff violence and resistance.
Right, a lot of the draft law being male-only reflects a combination of the reality that, relatively speaking, not much war has been waged since the end of WW2, and that much of contemporary gender equality is still somewhat new on a historical basis. So they're really just out of date laws with not much of an impetus to update, at least until recently. The worldwide trend is pretty clearly in the direction of making service and conscription, where needed, more gender agnostic. There are still some realities that don't really change here, such as men being most useful for direct combat, so even if women are conscripted it's likely they'll still avoid much of the worst of warfare simply by virtue of not qualifying for stringent standards.
reply