I think Nvidia now has a solid case that A) it's illegal (only congress can tax stuff, right?) and that B) a ban is unwarranted because of the attempted illegal export tax.
I'm not sure NVIDIA will object. On the contrary, it appears they have welcomed Trump's new proposal.
That doesn't sound like the Streisand Effect.
The Streisand Effect happens when someone objects to something that threatens their privacy, and that objection backfires and paradoxically causes more publicity.
It's not just a disclosure that someone doesn't want to occur.
Also, these things breed plutonium, as in, white flash in your city when terrorists get a hold of it.
If terrorists wanted to wreak havoc with plutonium, it would be extremely difficult for them to build a bomb with it. They'd find it much easier just to sprinkle it into the water supply. Plutonium is highly toxic.
I suspect Porsche was trying to stop thieves who would disconnect the satellite link in order to keep the car from receiving a kill-switch signal.
Disable the car when it loses the satellite link, and that plan is foiled. That'll teach 'em! Oh wait...
I was referring to the common usage of "AI", which (at this point in time) refers exclusively to LLMs.
And LLMs are generally run on neural nets, which are substantially more than just statistics, as I was saying.
I agree that LLMs are what most people think AI is right now. But they're not the only kind of AI. And granted, some of these kinds arise from the realm of statistical modeling.
Never mind, I think I misunderstood evanh's post. I'll let myself out.
Statistical analysis is an important skill for any scientific field. But it's hardly the "guts" of AI.
AI is so much more: wide areas of applied math (linear algebra, differential equations, optimization theory, etc.) combined with computer science, all to support the actual "guts" of AI, which are neural nets. I'm sure I left out a ton of other things.
Either you're posting to the wrong story, or I shudder to think what you mean by "local hardware" when applied to a story about college students.
Yes, but in the OP's example of someone collapsing because of a medical condition, that's generally not something people are motivated to record by a thought process along the lines of "I should document this in case it proves to be important to one of the involved parties." Usually, it really is because they're hoping it will score them some fake internet points when they post it on social media.
Then it's not schadenfreude. Profiting from someone else's misfortune, even trivially, is not the same as enjoying it.
And those who watch the video are not necessarily engaging in schadenfreude. They could have a fascination or concern about someone's misfortune without actually enjoying it.
In short, schadenfreude is not the only reason people view the misfortune of others. Quite likely not even the primary reason.
Making a video recording of someone else's misfortune could be schadenfreude but not necessarily.
Okay, call it schadenfreude by proxy if you want. The idea that people will record things they assume others might want to view for the entertainment value.
False choice. It could be schadenfreude by or not by proxy. But there are other options. That was the point of my post.
Schadenfreude is not just "gawking" at someone else's misfortune. It's taking pleasure in it.
Making a video recording of someone else's misfortune could be schadenfreude but not necessarily. It could arise from a well-placed desire to keep a record of the situation for whatever reason. Think George Floyd, plane crash, ICE raid, and so on. Videos of such events help to report and analyze them later.
Or it could just be an attempt by spectators to cope with a bad situation at arms length. Not particularly helpful, but it fulfills a desire to do something.
And what happens when you wash it?
Don't use whitening agents. Your washer will explode.
The Nature article's abstract mentions the absorption is in the visible-light range, from 400 nm to 700 nm wavelength. As you said, the article does not mention anything about heat (i.e., infrared radiation) but surely the fabric would emit heat as a blackbody at a nonzero Kelvin temperature. And in this case, the blackbody literally would appear black.
The directive, sent in an internal memo on Tuesday, is focused on applicants for H-1B visas for highly skilled workers, which are frequently used by tech companies, among other sectors. The memo was first reported by Reuters; NPR also obtained a copy.
"If you uncover evidence an applicant was responsible for, or complicit in, censorship or attempted censorship of protected expression in the United States, you should pursue a finding that the applicant is ineligible" for a visa, the memo says. It refers to a policy announced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio in May restricting visas from being issued to "foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans."
There's a difference between cautious skepticism and blinding cynicism.
To be sure. Could you explain how that applies here?
The shortest distance between two points is under construction. -- Noelie Alito
