I don't see a mechanism for the little guy to 'opt out'...case in point: I have a popular youtube channel, I don't want OpenAI harvesting it without compensation. How do individual social media accounts opt out? Sounds like they are just negotiating with major studios at high levels. Aren't they scraping social media as well still?

Current consensus is that Neanderthals and modern humans are the same species. Genetic analysis shows a couple of percent Neanderthal DNA in modern Europeans. The image of Neanderthal as "hunched, sloping forehead, and ape-like" is thought to be incorrect, it comes from one skeleton that is believed to have been deformed, possibly having acromegaly.

About half a dozen distinct human "types" (Neanderthal is one) are known to have existed, it's thought that there were several more, possibly many more, but evidence from that far back is sparse. It's thought that they were all the same species and could interbreed successfully.

Neanderthals were shorter, stockier, and had larger cranial capacity, but sometime around 70,000 years ago, a different subtype, homo sapiens sapiens, got the upper hand cognitively. Around 40,000 years ago they were the only subtype remaining. (Note that there was an ice age at the time.)

About 10,000 years ago we switched from hunter-gatherers to farming and herding, stayed in one place for generations, and began to build civilization. About 3,000 BC we started casting metal, which was the start of the bronze age.

All of these are approximate, different sources give different dates, the dates change as new evidence comes up (usually pushing the dates further back), and you can't really pin down a specific date anyway. For example, lots of cultures went through the bronze age at different times: it started somewhere in the near East, and swept over the globe over the course of hundreds of years, agriculture was independently invented in 10 or more places, and so on.

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.

I think it's even more interesting, in that one or two humans have to decide whether to question a call, and they have to identify calls that were wrong, not just ones they want to overturn, and they don't have a great angle to figure out what the algorithm would do. I think it's going to be fun to see batters try to do the ump's job, while standing to the side and considering swinging at the pitch.

We need a clearinghouse for photography and video as well. I'm guessing this is just for Microsoft AI. There needs to be one for all models wanting to use copyrighted content. It would suck to have to upload your stuff to 10 different clearinghouses.

something like this would help stop the bandwidth leeching going on right now on every site on the internet, in addition to the IP theft.

A new validation mechanism is needed to verify and filter for human authored works in a large and growing variety of fields. This will likely involve being not lazy, and not relying on AI itself to vet for human created works. The current methods are obviously less and less usable as AI becomes more and more skilled at impersonating the tone and feel of human authored works.

I think this will necessarily mean a return to a more analog, labor intensive review of works and manual vetting of authors through social connections, voice calls, etc. to make sure the person actually exists. The problem and the solution is that it will create barriers that are harder to surmount to get your legitimate work published. Other commenters have mentioned the need for non-corporate or university independent citizen scientists to still be able to submit papers without a huge financial or labor burden. How do you reconcile that? How often does that actually happen?

The thing is, a lot of these tech companies rely on making everything automated for maximum profit margin with minimum labor. They just want a cash machine that prints money once set up and lightly maintained. That approach is antithetical to to the high-touch solution needed here.

What barriers would you use to stem the flood of fakes that are automatically or semi-automatically submitted, and then thoroughly vet the remainder? Fees for submission? Even a very low fee, say $20, would stop a lot of auto-generated fakes from being automatically submitted.

This problem is also very acute in the self publishing world - low quality re-hashes of fiction and fact-based books showing up on Amazon and elsewhere. Wikipedia articles turned into books, fiction books plagiarized into other fiction books. The scam is that if you upload 10,000 fake books, which are easy to generate, you just need a small percentage of them to sell every now and then to start making some serious money. It's very tempting, the tools are all there, and some people having nothing but time to set this type of grift in motion.

People likely to succeed in managing a business will be low in trait agreeableness. This is well known and has been known for years.

Despite the apparent implication of "disagreeable" people being bad, it means that such people are more focused on themselves, unlikely to be swayed by the opinions of others, and more self serving. It's a trait that allows businesses to succeed, by having the owner focus on the success goals of the business instead of the success goals of other people.

Contrast with high agreeableness, where the person is more externally focused. Psychologists and nurses would typically be high agreeableness.

Everyone has an agreeableness score, and it's a bell curve. The fact that there are people who aren't "fair" is compensated by people who are exceptionally giving.

...that I cancelled my account a long time ago. It was completely and utterly useless.

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.

It's not just amazon.

I ordered a thermostat for my mustang last week. It was described as "sold and shipped by Walmart."

A couple of days later, I found an Autozone box on my porch. And not just the box, but the shipping return address was to auto zone!

??

the real tragedy of Viet Nam was that the US achieved *exactly* what it set out to do--which was a really stupid thing to do and waste lives upon.

The mission was *not* to defeat the north Vietnamese, but to keep them on their side of an imaginary line. US troops that went over the line got called back.

When the US finally decided it wanted to stop playing, the north wouldn't let them simply leave. To get them to talk, the US bombed them into submission, for crying out loud.

By any *military* standard, Viet nam was an overwhelming success for the US. US troops controlled whatever ground they chose, and won all of the battles.

But "resist aggression and stay on your side of the line" is a *stupid*, even criminal, thing to ask of a military. As is the lives it through away for idiocy.

>They didn't say whose value it strengthened.

LG's, Westinghouse, GE, and so forth!

Actually, if they had the testicular fortitude, your Samsung would display an add reading, "if you had bought LG, you wouldn't be seeing this!" :)

hawk