Setting aside the fact this was definitely not unprompted, social engineering might be the one thing AI is actually better at than a human. That is after all one of the biggest uses for bots for a while now by way of spam bots trying to social engineer people into various activities.
Unfortunately there are very few actual CGM brands available. There are a bunch of different CGMs, but most of them are just relabels of other units, almost all of which are made by either Dexcom or Abbott. Even more unfortunately in my experience they wildly exaggerate the accuracy and lifetime of the units. Most claim an accuracy of +/- 20% which is pathetic for 14 days, but you’re lucky if it maintains even that terrible level of accuracy for half that time.
In my case I’m horrendously allergic to the adhesive that Dexcom uses on their units, so I can’t even use half the CGMs on the market, and I gave up on Abbott after their units started to struggle to even make it 48 hours without being off by more than 50 mg/dl.
No, you have failed to understand how either license works. Companies are forced to contribute back in the case of the GPL and the project can choose to accept that or not. In the case of the BSD license companies can choose whether to contribute back and if they do, then the project has the option to accept it or not. The GPL makes it always the choice of the project, while the BSD makes it always the choice of the company.
Basically his argument is that because some companies choose to contribute back to BSD projects even though they aren’t required to, and because some GPL projects choose not to merge some changes from downstream forks, the GPL and BSD licenses are effectively the same. I think the flaw in this logic should be pretty apparent. I think the GPLv2 vs. GPLv3 debate is a lot more interesting, particularly since Linus has come out against GPLv3.
The point isn’t to make it forensically undetectable, but to prevent the room temperature IQ cop from noticing what happened. If they “unlock” the phone and don’t see anything that looks out of the ordinary they won’t make a big deal out of it and there’s a chance they’ll let you go.
WTF is tesseract?
It still doesn’t make sense because of the power density. The size of the solar array you would need is completely impractical. Even a “large foldable solar panel” isn’t going to cut it. Most satellites are relatively low power and even then the size of the solar arrays they have relative to the volume of the satellite is massive. Something as energy hungry as a data center pretty much demands a “small” nuclear generator to power it and the practicality of getting that into orbit nevermind the issues when it eventually de-orbits makes that a nonstarter.
Don’t forget power it as well. Watched a video where someone did the math and to generate the power required of a typical data center you’d need a solar array something like 40 times the size of the one on the ISS. It would be an absolute behemoth of a satellite and that’s without taking into account the cooling which would likely double the size again. Of course once you get that big then you have to worry about keeping the thing in orbit because moving that much mass isn’t exactly easy. No matter how you slice it it’s a stupid ass idea that doesn’t work.
I had never heard of them but apparently it’s an “open source” AI platform. Basically AWS but aimed specifically at running LLMs.
Well first you need to invent AGI which is probably at least a decade away still, but once you do that then you negotiate with that AGI to carve out a little corner of the Internet and lock all of us inside it.
Claiming your AI product sucks and doesn’t do what it’s asked to do (aka hallucinates) is a bold move, lets see how it works for them Cotton.
If you’re influencing the outcome via some private mechanism that’s a crime and is in fact illegal (a little thing known as insider trading or cheating depending on how you go about it). So per your definition either you can’t influence the outcome in which case it’s gambling, or you can in which case it’s illegal and you’re committing a crime.
All that said I think the definition of gambling being truly random isn’t quite right. Gambling has always been about statistical outcomes because if it was truly random nobody would ever make any money off of it so nobody would waste their time. Remember the house always wins because they control the odds. These sites are just bookies in techbro clothing using marketing and legal loopholes to run illegal gambling sites.
I hate how they’re supporting the fiction that this isn’t gambling by calling it a “prediction site”. It’s gambling, always has been.
MS has mastered the one thing businesses love which is being perfectly mediocre. If you present a business two pieces of software one that does one thing really well but nothing else, and one that does three things terribly, they’ll pick the one that does three things terribly every time. That’s the MS design, it smears a thin coating of suck across as broad a surface as possible and then advertises that it does everything.
You should be able to remove any or all the certs as well, although I could see an argument for requiring you to enter the BIOS to do that.
The way it should work is that during the OS install the OS can ask to have a cert added to the keystore at which point UEFI pops up a screen that says something like:
An application has requested to add a new certificate to secure boot which will allow new software to run at boot up. This usually happens when installing or updating an OS. If you would like to allow this press and hold <5 randomly selected letters> on the keyboard for 5 seconds. If you don’t want to allow this press and hold escape for 3 seconds.
This would at least be a vendor agnostic way of enrolling certificates instead of the MS certificate just always being pre-installed. It should also of course be publicly documented exactly how the process works so everyone can use it.
No, OS X aggressively resists customization or convenience. There’s the Apple way to do pretty much everything and the painful way which is anything but the Apple way. Windows is anti-consumer because they want to harvest your data and cram ads down your throat. OS X just doesn’t care what you want or what you would prefer and will actively punish you if you attempt to deviate from the way it thinks you should be doing things. If something doesn’t work the way you want tough, OS X makes you adapt to it rather than trying to adapt to you.
The correct industry term is white label products.
Since Reagan it has been one of the Republican pillars that businesses should have no regulations, taxes, or standards of any kind. They will of course break from that position when they see an opportunity to screw over a minority or attack a business they don’t like for some reason, but otherwise yes ask your average Republican if some business regulation (or regulatory agency) should be repealed and they almost always say yes.
The biggest surprise at the moment is actually that many of the voters are turning against the data centers, although I suspect the majority of them would still oppose any kind of regulatory attempt to block them.
It’s to feed the algorithms and get more views. They get paid based on the number of views a video gets. The higher the algorithm promotes a video, the more views they get. Getting lots of comments on a video causes the algorithm to promote it more. It costs the spammers almost nothing to shit out a quick thirst trap video but they need to get enough views to recoup that cost which means there is a minimum number of views they need to break even. It’s not a huge number as far as these platforms go, but it’s also not nothing so anything they can do to encourage more views is mandatory for them.