So if YouTube is now serving up the ads directly to me, does that mean they're finally liable for the content of those ads? Can we have them investigated for all the malware, phishing, illegal hate speech, etc.?
@lemmy.world
So if YouTube is now serving up the ads directly to me, does that mean they're finally liable for the content of those ads? Can we have them investigated for all the malware, phishing, illegal hate speech, etc.?
Firing for relatively small mistakes just means people will cover up mistakes in the future leading to them causing serious accidents. People who make mistakes learn from them and not only rarely make that mistake again, but help others learn from that mistake.
I'll happily admit when something is my fault. And I'll document and implement changes that help prevent it from happening not just to the teams I lead but as much of the company as I can influence.
But OpenAI not being allowed to use the content for free means they are being prevented from making a profit, whereas the Internet Archive is giving away the stuff for free and taking away the right of the authors to profit. /s
Disclaimer: this is the argument that OpenAI is using currently, not my opinion.
He'll take one basket out of a fryer and say he worked as a fry cook for the rest of the campaign. Make him do it for a single hour at a peak time without any help and see what happens. Bet he or someone there will end up in the hospital and no one will get any fries.
We really need some upstream minimums as well. That causes so much lag for me. Most plans are 1 up even with 100 down. I have a 200/10 plan now and it's difficult to do work with the maybe 5 that I get in practice if I'm lucky, especially after overhead from VPN.
We took profit for decades from letting our infrastructure decay. Now we still want that same amount of profit, so you have to pay more for us to fix all the problems that should have been fixed with that profit money in the past.
It's the stupid toxic "romance" that I want rid of. It gets so boring and tedious to watch. If it's important to the story, then fine. But otherwise can we just normalize friendship between opposite gendered people without the need for bad relationship drama, jealousy, and normalizing the idea that when someone says no, they're actually just "playing hard to get".
Tech patents are ridiculous. Let's end them or reduce them to 1-3 years with no renewal. Then all that's left is the specific copyright to the technology, not lingering webs of patents that don't make any sense anyway to anyone with detailed knowledge of the tech. All they're good for is big companies using legal methods to stop innovation and competition. Tech moves too fast for long patents and is too complex for patent examiners or courts to understand what is really patentable. So it comes down to who has the most money for lawyers.
No it sounds like it didn't copy itself to another server, nor does it understand what that means or entails. It just said that's what it would do given the hypothetical scenario. This is likely because of some dystopian fiction it was trained on. The system doesn't have the capability to do these things and any program should never be given that capability whether it's "AI" or not. If any software has that capability then the only one that would benefit from using it would be hackers.
Instead of lowering their prices over time and so sales are less significant of a percentage, they keep the original price indefinitely and just have lots of sales. This makes the percentage off much higher than if they had depreciated the regular price as it should. Pretty common these days.
No one is asking for deflation. They're asking for wages that don't decrease every year due to inflation and companies not giving raises or giving raises so small that it's still a pay decrease since it's not keeping up with inflation.
Basically, they just raised their prices by 18% and blamed it on the greedy, useless employees. I don't know why businesses bother selflessly "creating jobs" if they are so much trouble. Shouldn't those be the first things to cut to make their business more efficient under capitalism? Stop doing charity work and run the business yourself.
To get sorted to the top of the lists for biggest discount. To claim bigger losses in copyright infringement cases. And to increase the perceived immediacy to buy it to get a good deal to take advantage of impulse buying whereas if they have time to think about it they may not buy it at all. Plus rich people don't care how much something costs, so you'll get a few of them here and there buying it at full price.
I couldn't care less about flat earthers. It's the lack of moderation of hate speech that prompted me to leave Meta products. When the speech is specifically designed to harm others it's a huge difference from just harming themselves and their willing peers. Allowing spreading that LGBTQ+ people are mentally ill or that Autistic people need to be fixed rather than accepted, or that all immigrants are bad people, those things are not just bad science (though that's part of it). They are designed to have those people ostracized or murdered. That is not "respectful disagreement". That is pure hate-speech, even if the person saying it truly believes it. It is detrimental to the community and if that is allowed here like on Meta now, I'll happily leave as a proud LGBTQ+ and neurodivergent person among other things that current "political discourse" (i.e. acceptable hate) is being allowed to spread.
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...