I have never done business with them and don't use the address they spam for commerce anyway. And they will not stop spamming you once they start. I just checked my mail log and they're still at it as of this morning.
Tractor Supply: more pathetic bottom-feeder trash doing anything for nickel.
So humans outsourcing their judgement to a robot to write a report about humans outsourcing their judgement to robots.
From Deloitte's perspective, the problem here is that human judgement is still involved in the payment processing chain.
The Tamagotchi was a far superior useless electronic friend. This is simply obvious.
More seriously, what is supposed to happen is pretty straightforward. These folks get a subpoena, they search their stored surveillance for hits, probably with an account identifier as a selector. They send responsive documents back along with some legal boilerplate and a signature.
In this case, I would guess these folks would struggle to correctly respond to a subpoena, because they don't appear to be a functional company yet.
The thing is, everyone knows this party is going to end badly. The numbers involved are a huge multiple of the money that evaporated in the dot.com crash, and a healthy multiple of the 2008 crash.
So the game (particularly for those with big exposure to OAI or their investors, but really everyone, because this is going to tank the market) now is timing. And you never want to depend on timing the market. So...
What's your 401K invested in? If you left it in the Target 20x0 fund, do you know what that even holds? The big companies are asking their version of that, too.
weird that Microsoft decided to shift away from AMD for their Ai processors (and go for internally designed ones), only for OpenAI (a partner of Msft) to pick up the AMD chips.
I don't think it is any weirder than other big tech shenanigans (the Space Nazi Junky buying Twitter?). Microsoft knows OAI cannot sustain their valuation and doesn't want to be pulled into the crater. OAI isn't getting the moat they thought they would out of Microsoft. They both want independence from the other and are scrambling to disentangle.
Usually built by the owner, sometimes the bookkeeper, an important aspect is only the author understands it well enough to change it. Others might be allowed to enter stuff in specific places, but otherwise altering the BCS will result in months of recrimination.
One way to distinguish a BCS from a lesser monstrosity is a BCS will have known bugs, but fixing them makes it "stop working".
When you've encountered one of these, you know.
Anyway, now we'll get robot-mediated BCSes. This will allow an energetic small business owner with a bad case of NIH incremental increase in complexity before it collapses into incoherence again, and probably increase the total volume of dead code, unnecessary indirection and general weirdness, but won't change a whole lot.
If USF wants to hire a carnival barker and announce every single passerby, I still see no problem.
So what's the problem?
If you disagree, please describe the workloads which require being in space and have an ROI justifying both deployment and ongoing maintenance costs for this stupidity.
A lot of the 20-somethings we employ write like this in chat. They're perfectly capable of competently writing more formal documents like functional specs or performance reviews, ditto decent code. But in slack or other chat environments, they type utterly lazy, typo-ridden messes of messages.
I can see how growing up texting other kids from when you can operate a phone results in... let's call it a highly permissive spelling environment. And it is clearly contextual behavior. But it is jarring.
But if they fly low enough, I bet you could take one out with a water hose. Of one of these.
Bias in search indexes was fun and all, but bias in robot friends is going to be *lit*.
Anyway, I think Starbucks is just a highly salient symbol of globalized capitalism, and angry people like to break things. Not sure it is much more complicated than that.
In my view, flashy and messy disorder, but cheaper than cop riots and you end up with a lot fewer people hurt.
His death motivated his followers to a massive rampage of hurting certain others, which was one of his goals. Particularly getting professors fired - that was one of his favorite things.
Martyrdom is powerful.
As a practical manner, assassination usually does not lead to the outcomes the killer seeks. People in general don't like targeted violence, most individuals are not essential, etc.
As a secondary matter, Luigi is smart, sexy, and clearly dedicated to his beliefs; if his impulse control worked a little better, he probably could have learned to be extremely persuasive. That's how you change things - by making other people want to change them, too.
There's always been a nasty streak there, but creeping incompetence seems to be making it worse.
Glad I saw some of it when I did.
Money is the root of all wealth.