they need to go further.

As I drive off to dutifully buy the wondrous stuff from the last commercial, the current commercial should jump to my phone so I don't miss it!

Music & Sound effects shouldn't even be on the same channel as voice!

Adding channels on a digital distribution isn't as complicated as what it takes to broadcast & decode stereo audio, whether AM or FM.

And then add a "relative volume" slider so that regular volume controls both (or even let the user choose a curve so that music doesn't increase as much as speech [or more, if the user prefers])

>ah i forgot another surprisingly common failure mode: cats peeing on the screen.

fluufffyyy!

it seems to me that removing such jobs would actually be a task well fitted to an AI . . .

Yes, but that's a _later_ problem.

The CCP is incredibly good at kicking the can down the road. I mean, most governments do a fair amount of that (not necessarily with regard to stuff in space specifically, only a handful of countries even have stuff in space; but there are other kinds of cans to kick down roads), but China is on another level. Short-term thinking is pretty much their whole modus operandi.

Although, hmm. I might potentially be persuaded to watch Encanto at some point, if the right other people are watching it and invite me to watch it with them. If so, it'll be the first Disney movie I've seen since Shrek.

Eh, you're preaching to the choir. I haven't watched a Hollywood movie made in the last fifteen years. The last one I saw in a theatre was LOTR:ROTK. I've seen a couple of movies more recently than that, but they were old ones.

When the thirty-second trailer looks boring and heavily derivative, it's pretty difficult to imagine that the actual movie could hold my interest for over an hour. Sorry, not interested. Do you know how long it's been since I saw a movie trailer or advertisement, that made me want to watch the movie?

Now, now.

You can't really say that you wren't warned about going hunting with Dick Cheney . . . :)

hawk

>If you have a hankering for murdering parking cops you don't need an app.

I think the motivation is more *avoiding* them than harming them!

If you wanted to harm them, you'd just tell their mothers that they weren't really hookers . . .

!

hawk

>In my state, the cops are legally required (and so) post public
>notices about where DUI checkpoints will be.

Speaking as an attorney who was still handling DUIs when checkpoints were in common use . . . announcing and pbulsihign ahead of time will make at most a marginal difference in the number of drunks heading through them.

You'll get a slight decrease in sober drivers who don't want the hassle, but drunk drivers just don't plan that well.

I recall my Criminal Procedure professor in law school commenting that he *really* wanted to get stopped in one and just sit there not speaking, staring straight ahead. Just to see what happened, as they couldn't possibly develop probable cause under the circumstances.

[*checks beard in mirror*]

oh, crap!

anyway, I both leaned unix on a pdp-11 at work and bought my first Mac in 1984.

Various Macs until I switched to a combination of unix and *nix as a graduate student, largel over LyX (largely a graphical front end to LaTeX at the time, as I was editing plenty of matrices full of integrals and such, so keyboard navigation was critical.

Then in 2008, back to a Mac laptop when it mugged me on clearance in Frys. I figured I could put FreeBSD (or maybe linux) on it, but it was a good enough *nix box, and it's battery management beat the daylights out of what I could get from FreeBSD or linux on a laptop.

And it's been Macs, largely used as *nix boxes, ever since, whether legal writing or developing software.

The bit on lower maintenance, less frequent replacement, and lower support costs goes back thirty years and more. And with some notable exceptions, the general quality of Apple hardware has been top tier, dating to when it was somewhat (but not hugely) better than #2 IBM.

Eh.

Some cultural features are neutral, e.g., what you do about shoes when entering a home. Do you take them off and leave them at the door because shoes are dirty? Do you keep your shoes on because you have guests and you don't want them to have to look at your feet because feet are disgusting? If you do take off the shoes, does it matter how you line them up, and which direction the toes point? This all depends how you were raised; it's neither good nor bad, it's just culture.

But some cultural features are actively good for society. Japanese culture has features that lead to a low crime rate, for instance, and that's a good thing. Many cultures value things like integrity (particularly, keeping your word) and hospitality, and these are good positive values, that are good for society. I think it follows that there can also be cultural features that are bad for society. To avoid offending foreigners, I'll pick on my own society for an example here: in American culture, it's normal for people to deliberately lie to their children about important ontological issues, for entertainment purposes. That's *evil* but almost everyone here does it. (One of the best examples of this phenomenon, is Santa Claus.)

Bringing it back around to the Persian example from the article, my question would be, why is it that humans native to the culture only get this right 80% of the time. AI getting it wrong most of the time doesn't bother me, that's the AI companies' problem, and phooey on them anyway, so what. But if humans native to the culture are missing it 20% of the time, to me, that makes it sound like it must be some kind of esoteric, highly-situational interaction that regular people wouldn't have to deal with on anything resembling a regular basis; but no, we're talking about a basic social interaction that people have to do every day. Something seems off about that. That's a lot of pressure to put on people, to undertake something that difficult, and be expected to get it right all the time, and then catastrophically fail one time out of five. I don't think I'd want to live under that kind of social pressure.

Eh, I kind of hope Hollywood goes all-in on AI generated content, tbh. They haven't produced much that's worth watching any time recently anyway, and if they go under, maybe it'll clear the way for better content creators to rise to prominence, maybe even someone who can figure out how to write a script from scratch, that is NOT the eighty-third sequel to a mediocre nineties action movie, or the twenty-seventh reboot of a superhero franchise.

On the one hand, yes, the job market *is* a bit down right now, and yes, getting a job, especially a decent one, has always been more difficult when you don't have any meaningful work experience yet.

But I don't think it's really significantly worse, at least here in the Midwest, than in past generations. The young people I know, generally have been able to find work that is commensurate with their qualifications, to an extent that is pretty comparable to what I've seen in the past, most of the time. Occasionally, somebody in a previous generation has gotten lucky and had an easier time and gotten snapped up for basically the first real job application they filled out, because the economy was up or whatever (my own experience getting an IT job in 2000 is an excellent example of this), but that has always been the exception rather than the rule. For most of history, getting your first really _good_ job has been difficult, and often required you to work a not-so-fantastic job for a few years first. (Heck, I worked fast food for several years, including a couple of years after getting my degree, before I lucked into that IT job. I've never regretted having that in my background, though I'm certainly pleased it didn't end up being my entire career.)

On the gripping hand, my experience with Gen Z is that in terms of employment opportunities, they aren't really any more entitled, on average, than Millennials were at the same age. Somewhat less so, if anything. If there's an aspect of their attitude that's worse, it's more social than professional and is related to how much they expect other people (especially casual acquaintances, like coworkers) to care about learning and accommodating all their personal idiosyncracies that aren't work-related. But this could be my Gen-X bias coming through: we were taught to only reveal personal stuff to people we're actually close to. We expected our phone numbers to be public knowledge, but we kept our personal feelings private. Gen Z is pretty much the reverse.

there are lots of those, often with their own "store." I find batteries like that a lot.

But this was explicitly a Walmart listing, by Walmart, rather than a 3d party listing.