

OpenAI told me in an email that it used its own AI models to analyze data from the device—including forensic images of the data stored on the device—to find their suspect.
They will never find out
The entity formerly known as Quantum Device trying to swim the fediverse…


OpenAI told me in an email that it used its own AI models to analyze data from the device—including forensic images of the data stored on the device—to find their suspect.
They will never find out


deleted by creator


Apparently he considers that play for citizens does not implies complacency with the government, which makes an interesting point, especially if many countries have governments that you condem with some citizens that indeed complain about their governments in there and that may be is your target audience and you want to support… regarding your tolerance threshold vs profesionalism concept it would may be hard to find work at all otherwise. But for sure at a certain point of government abuses, unless you declare openly your support or not, it looks like you tacitly approve it, and the apparent message rises, and then is practically like directly asking the actor about his personal opinion and not wanting to answer, which looks like an answer itself. He may have just met the threshold with the situation, may even be contractually lured into it in the first place and found a “way out”…


Trump demands ninhi ninhinhi ninhinhi or ninhi ninhi


I wish Trump decides to rename something in Europe and Google complies so another jump in degooglelization takes place there…


Those are weird priorities…


I am pretty sure that he is just favouring friends handling their competition…


Information and entropy changed, if you melt ice figures to refrozen the water again you go the other way around, but you have introduced/extracted things during the process, so I stop seeing the philosophical wonder.
To begin with “how many things are in the room?” an in-depth list should include all the energy in all their forms, including matter and organisation, and when you perform processes that change this you logically vary the full list of things in the room.


Infrastructures are expensive. Startegic ones must be owend and maintained by all the people for the people, regardless individual usage, since being strategic have impact in every individual.


Except in Italy, nearly the totality of the coast is privately handled and you must pay to access it…


The theoretical minimum would be sharing any instant of their lives, during which they could not sustain an unfettered access to anything, not like I would consider it a decent minimum in any case (I was revolving around the “unfettered access” concept of the previous comment), but I cannot imagine how it would exists any threshold of supervision above which you can exclude any unfettered access at any given moment of their existence, risk of harmful exposition never drops to zero, so argue an Orwellian measure for the indiscriminate shake of their safety has no sense to me…


Indeed, unfettered in a literal sense cannot happen even with the most minimum supervision, but regardless of the threshold in parenting (I am not going to pardon parents responsibility on this, but good luck asserting 100% supervision), circumventions will always take place, so with more reason it cannot be used the “kids safety” argument to bring Orwellian levels to everybody’s lifes


Many comments are about how impractical/useless is this technology TODAY considering easier alternatives… but I see research exploring recharging electric flight devices in flight, which sounds as cool as powerful to have flight devices with larger services and ranges


In a lawless place there is no enforcement of one’s word, is blind trust or nothing…


At least until the bottom 50% has as much as the top 50%


Apparently it was due to old intel pre-2015 (when the building was repurposed as a school) where that building was allegedly an ammo depot of the military complex besides… bombing with 10 year old intel, for sure a lack of care for human lives


I double dare you!
I think it depends of the definition of a god that you can prove or disprove their existence, I remember the invisible green dragon in Carl Sagan’s garage: only falseable gods can be proven or disproven, if defined unfalseable then there is nothing to discuss about (but at the same time such god would have zero consequences/influence in our universe)