A resounding success. No large-scale demonstrations, damaged cameras, lawsuits or political suicide for those involved. So we can expect this to be rolled out fully.

Crime prevention? Who said this has anything to do with crime?

Ditto. Sounds like I'll just need to dynamically avoid their restaurants...

Hacks the DOJ.

Dot: I'm finished! Here you are! Aren't I a good dot?

AC: Holy fuck, how'd you do that?

FBI kicks down door.

both sides.

Found your problem.

I didn't know about this stuff, and would rather eat better tasting bananas and def not gmo. But, I found out from googling that actually bananas have a lot of polyphenol oxidas (PPO) and if you eat it at the same time as berries and good antioxidant flavanoids, the PPO breaks it all down within an hour even in your stomach. You need to not mix them, or eat them like 2 hours apart, or you can process the bananas with heat etc. Lemon only slows it like 15%. Even if they aren't brown they have the PPO. So actually these GMO bananas could maybe be used in smoothies. That said, no thanks. These people are just doing it to extend shelf life and not going trust their crispr process to be safe. That, and once you grow these bananas they will end up in all kinds of supply chains eventually.

Not just the testing process. We've decided that leaving junk in orbit to reenter randomly is no longer acceptable so you have to demonstrate to a high degree of confidence that you're going to be able to reenter on target before you're allowed to go orbital. Starship in particular is gigantic, made out of steel and designed to survive reentry. If that were screwed up it would be a lot worse than the just-barely-enough-to-do-the-job that most rockets are made of.

How about governments using AI to process intelligence and making strategic decisions based on the AI's "insights".

Stop reading tech news?

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to. The three possibilities:

1) The training is distilling their own model? Yes, I guess you could argue that. It's even dumber than the argument about distilling other peoples' models though.

2) The contractor using a third party model to evaluate the output of the contracting company's model: yeah, you could argue that's distilling. That's on the contractor who's not doing what they're supposed to be though.

3) Or did you mean you're distilling the contractors' brains? You are doing that yes. That's explicitly what they're getting paid for.

A Merkle Tree is not a tree of hashes. Unless you want to say, hashkeys are sorted in a Merkle Tree as a set of hashes.

I have no idea what you're trying to say with this.

I did reread your original message and, minus the bullshit at the beginning, if your point is that Bitcoin's transaction tracking is novel, it's not. It was proposed by Hal Finney in 2004. Satoshi neglects to reference it.

I was also incorrect. Bitcoin didn't come up with the hash based proof of work concept either. That's reference 6.

They probably never dreamed big companies would put these cheap boards in everything.

I'd be surprised if they didn't. Industrial computers were stupidly priced before the Raspberry Pi. Lots of them still are. And industrial customers care much more about whether the drivers work than whether they're open source.

"Word-guessing?" How does this naive notion persist?

It's true. Kind of. Just enough to make a catchy false premise.

Also, the human brain is barely comfortable with binary. It does not like probability, much less distributions. It especially doesn't like conditional distributions.

They don't need contractors for that

They do need contractors for that. That's what the contractors are doing. The model produces a couple of outputs and a human chooses which one they think is better. That goes in the training data. You can also ask the same or another model which is better, but that defeats the purpose.

If I call tech support or the bank or whatever, I don't want, need nor expect to see the other person's face. In general, video calling isn't widely used except in multi-person meetings, or when calling a loved one overseas. The avatar is not needed.

Also, give your AI agent a phone number where I can reach it, or give it its dedicated app or whatever, but default to "handset mode" like a regular phone call. Let me put it on speaker if and when I want to. Turning the interaction into a regular phone call will go a long way towards making the conversation feel more natural. Interacting with Siri and Alexa feels unnatural; adding an animated avatar to a disembodied voice won't help, even if the conversation itself flows naturally. I know, a phone call isn't suitable for every interaction, especially when collaborating or co-creating with someone, but it covers most cases.

But I guess a simple audio call is harder to monetize.

Police generally don't need a warrant to request security camera footage or obtain it voluntarily. They need a warrant to compel the owner to give it to them.

Whether the owner volunteers footage and under what conditions they do so is pretty much up to them. Ring used to be pretty free about it but clamped down when it became controversial. Public sources like traffic cameras are likewise up to the public agency or government that owns them and they often have privacy laws or policies that might require warrants.

Flock is obviously motivated to cooperate with police requests since that's the service they're providing. It isn't "the way it's always been" but the OP's suggestion of requiring warrants could be easily implemented. Tapping phones without a warrant was perfectly legal in the US until it became a problem and a law was passed.