2/3rds of Americans don’t know what AI is or the limitations of LLMs.

That’s not what the purpose of the nuclear regulations is. The purpose of the onerous regulations is to prevent construction of nuclear plants and competition with fossil fuels.

Got a source for this claim?

So they are training ChatGPT to pencil whip the regulations that are in place to prevent Chernobyl?

Talk about regulatory capture…

We’re all doomed

It’s not some crazy conspiracy to say this doesn’t look like an accident

“Apple didn’t know De Niro hadn’t signed off on that one as the final version”

Then they are at fault for not verifying they are putting the right words on the teleprompter

“If you’re going to attribute an action to a company as a whole, then it at least needs to be a decision made by a high-level employee and not some peon.”

I’ve had many experiences with companies that fire “peons” for bad PR or misrepresenting the views of the company or however HR wants to word it to avoid legal problems.

It is very easy for CEOs or upper management or middle management to pass down orders that are worded in a way that imply what they want workers to do without saying it in a legally binding way.

“The idea that Apple decided to just unilaterally delete portions of his speech at the last minute, without his consent, is among the least plausible scenarios.”

Then why is it the first conclusion that De Niro and many others came to?

“Anybody with any actual authority at the company is smart enough to know how stupid that would be.”

Because it looks like they are censoring his speech.

CODA is irrelevant here.

Apple admitted they made a mistake with the teleprompter.

We can only speculate why it happened.

Considering the context of what was removed I doubt it was a coincidence.

If Apple wanted him to only talk about certain things during his speech they could’ve communicated that before he accepted their request for him to give a speech.

He probably would’ve turned down the request.

You acknowledge that it is common for actors to do what he did so it is safe to say Apple knew also.

So Apple takes the “it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission” approach and plays dumb.

So… the kind of situation where Apple would want more viewers.

I don’t buy it. Those decisions always include the actor for obvious reasons.

“Oops! We aCciDeNtLy cut out the part that might cause insurrection supporters to not watch our award show! Aww shucks our mistake increased our ratings.”

If they didn’t want to hear what HE had to say then why give him an award and a mic?

It is very common for actors to use their speeches as a chance to speak about issues important to them. From Joaquin Phoenix all the way back to Marlon Brando.

This is an obvious attempt from Apple to censor a speech they asked for.

All you did was show your motive for posting an intentionally misleading article.

deleted by creator

Try harder troll

Both sides ermaright? Herpa durr

And he had that official title before the Obama administration. So there’s no association. Do you think every federal worker is swapped out for a new one every time the president changes?

The guy was in the role for over twenty years. Way before the Obama administration. That’s a fact.

This article intentionally associates the actions of someone unrelated to the Obama administration… with the Obama administration.

I don’t need to know their motives to point out that fact.

This guy has nothing to do with the Obama administration. He was in that advisory role for over 20 years.

This post is intentionally misleading to push an agenda.

What do you have mixed feeling about exactly?