Molitor5901

Dark and edge movies. That's a good point. It felt like in television land, we had moved beyond the dark and foreboding Nordic Noir style programs and into something less dark. I liked Casino Royal, I thought that was as exciting of an action-Bond that I've seen.

For those of us who have invested in a chain or series for a long time, it may feel comfortable, predictable, and so when something changes it can burst the magical bubble of cinema. Perhaps that's the danger of film series that are basically the same, just a different story, whereas short periods before change conditions the audience to let go of a nostalgia, and keep plowing ahead because it's just enough of a change not to disrupt that comfort - yet modernizes etc.

too modern. As with a lot of series modernized, it may have the effect of taking something familiar, changing something that disrupts the.. nostalgia?

Perhaps I just feel old.. but I really, really wish they'd go back to making Bond films like Moonraker, Diamonds are Forever, and the Man with the Golden Gun. No big explosions, just nice cars, suave hero, good stories, and all the spy gadgets and things many of us love.

Albert Broccoli had the formula right and IMHO we should go back.

The last thing he typed has always sat deeply with me:

"Football Season Is Over

No More Games. No More Bombs. No More Walking. No More Fun. No More Swimming. 67. That is 17 years past 50. 17 more than I needed or wanted. Boring. I am always bitchy. No Fun — for anybody. 67. You are getting Greedy. Act your old age. Relax — This won't hurt”

This is only my opinion, but in my experience with marijuana it doesn't seem to relieve pain so much as it makes you forget, or ignore for a bit, that the pain is there.

I think platforms like that will survive on essentially rage and bitterness. People will always flock to platforms like X, Bluesky, iFunny, and others to vent and rage. There's so much anger in nearly every post that I don't see any of it as particularly useful, or a good use of one's time.

I agree, but the money laundering would be a de facto criminal act. It would be a mistake, however, to give payment processors a version of Sec. 230. For any financial institution that could be calamitous. Maybe there should be a very minimal line of protection, much like we do with a lot of cybersecurity for banks - they self certify they are doing their best. It still goes back to the original concern: If a payment processor can block someone for a political view, or a business for a social view, what's not stopping them from blocking someone merely over a disagreement about speech - for anyone.

This sounds cool! I remember when I came upon HURLING (the sport) late one evening and it was absolutely incredible. A bunch of guys with no helmets running around bouncing a baseball on the end of a short hockey stick, and then slamming that ball across the field.. I thought surely someone was about to get beaned. Incredible sport.

It's because they're not looking for a place just to live, they want a place where they want to live. Otherwise RVs would be parked all over America, instead of just in downtowns and other urban areas. Everyone wants to live in the Noe Valley and walk to the Whole Foods, but space, and supply and demand make that simply impossible without absolute government control of housing.

There is affordable housing, but it's not where people want to live. I am concerned articles like these support the notion that everyone must live in a bustling metropolis in the heart of everything. The article cites up to $45/night to park an RV. Thirty days is $1350. In Valdosta, Georgia, the average apartment rent is approximately $1,004 per month

Arkansas median rent of $868.

There is affordable housing, even buying, but more publications must get off this notion that everyone must live in Highland Park, or the Castro, or even Midtown Atlanta.

To me it felt a little more about being left behind. I felt this undercurrent of bitterness that the city the author once exalted, through the tech boom, the tech bro era, is leaving her behind, and in its place are the natural progressions of that era she whims nostalgically about.

Like the factory towns of the pre-digital era, when it's good it's great, but when they leave, innovate away, or move on it can leave those behind feeling cheated.

So the post is really click bait and does not tell the whole story?

I stopped at chicken restaurant in Georgia, and the drive through speaker was clearly AI. It sounded like a computer. It got the order wrong when it repeated, and stopped responding. So with some.. trepidation I said "Hello?" and after a few seconds an actual human (with noise in the background) responded, took my order, and all was right.

If they can apply AI to customer service phone queue hell, why not to most customer service transactions - my thinking goes - what will be next? Hospital? 000? Tax office?

Unless it's de facto illegal, payment processors should be business agnostic. You can make arguments that it's their platform, their business, they can do whatever they want - but that goes for insurance companies and everyone else we want to act neutrally.

This is nuts. I am deeply worried we are headed towards open armed conflict. The violence against political opponents must stop, no matter who it is.

I remember Matt Honan's ridiculou8s write-up in Wired magazine when he was Editor, complaining about getting in a taxi with the iPhone 6 in his back pocket and it bending. I'm sure we will see more of that.

I really don't want the liquid display so I guess this means i can't update my iPhone until they give us a way to permanently disable this.

That makes a lot of sense actually. Unions prefer union workers. Many of the unions are major pushers of higher minimum wage laws because it makes it more feasible to pay a little more for a union worker, than a non-union worker.

I've seen it affecting in a few ways: Less customer service employees at call centers, replaced by lengthy, egregiously pedantic AI systems. Some fast food places are replacing employees with an AI drive through. I've also seen AI health coaching services that removes the dietitian/nutritionist/health coach from the equation. Not quite AI, but getting there, are the self checkouts slowly replacing front line cashiers, etc.

So I think it is affecting the job market, but not in the white collar, higher paying jobs that people tend to notice.

Considering they relieved a pilot of command for ejecting when his F-35 become unresponsive, now they make them sit on conference calls. That pilot is very brave, I think others would have ejected by now. Making them fly around up there is ridiculous.

Well it's a good thing the risk was identified and mitigated.

Well this is how Chinese shippers on Amazon were able to sell goods so cheaply; in addition to the U.S. subsidizing Chinese mail costs. This will lead to a more fair and just system in the future. While the halt may seem like a bad thing, the dictation of global commerce means it's really symbolic. They can't withhold mail forever

Maybe. I am still not sold on the idea that porn should be so freely available to children, and we can't depend on parental controls - everyone reading this should know that by now. So we either keep our children off the internet, closely monitor their usage, or let them have at it.

As for destroying the internet? No. It may, in fact, make the internet a little better. Less bandwidth usage. Less intrusive advertisements, maybe even less spam.

Age verification for pornography is not the hill to die on. A national internet identification number is the hill to not only die on, but riot.

Is it really this bad for men dating, or is this more ..internal?

Another perspective if I may: People are used to the dating apps now which require just a few milliseconds of consideration before swiping yes, or no. That focus on essentially "hot or not" eliminates entire swaths of the dating pool to just those someone finds attractive. The worrisome part is that they take that mentality of "only swiping on ~10" that they've transferred it to the real world. Why bother talking to that man, or that women, when the app gives you thousands and thousands of infinite choice. Why settle when there's so many better ones to choose from?

This has quite a few issues with framing bias. It sets up this dichotomy between “polite society’s” vague, restrictive rules for men and the "manosphere’s" toxic but concrete guidance. Then she talks about only the men she has dated and kind of ignores the rest of male dating experience. All in all it just reads like a emotional attempt to persuade us to.. something.. but no real evidence. I don't think we can generalize men of the bay area, or men in general around these experience of one person.

I am becoming increasingly frustrated with ChatGPT, when I should be a prototypical user. I analyze and help develop U.S. public policy. Cgpt is great for pulling in vast amounts of data, especially surface level, very quickly. I can then churn through what it has found, ask questions, etc. in seconds.

However, when you give something to Cgpt is when it seems to fail. The first is that it has a terrible time with cross-memory contamination. New Chat should mean a new session, instead at times it acts like a continuation of all previous sessions. Ergo if I give it a paper to summarize, it will pull in data from other previous sessions and insert that as if it belonged. It will also pull in data (words) from the internet and erroneously cite them.

Some of that can be rectified with the most explicit and logic drive questions, but that sort of defeats the purpose of treating it "like a research assistant," as it is often referred to.

Second, is that it cannot process and return large documents. For example: A sixty page plain text file of a conference speaker transcript. Asking it to summarize the conference does not work, and if you ask it why, it will tell you: can't hold large documents in memory, or it will go into a loop, or it will give nothing. Another error limitation it reports is that it can only return so much to the web interface, that i can understand.

Third, is in how files are handled. Am I the only one that tries to download a file and it gives me the "failed to get status for /mnt/data..." Even small files, or it gives a very partial correct/incorrect document, the same document you gave it initially, or a mess...

Those have been the biggest problem. I recognize that as a user I need to adapt in a few ways: Be very explicit and logic driven in my requests; chunk to the smallest reasonable number of parts of documents; and others. Understand that it's ability to recall can be limited, even if give explicit instruction, so each query should be a healthy repeat of the last results.

But we're paying for this..which has us testing multiple LLMs alongside Cgpt before we seriously dive into one.

I get the concern bout Palantir but this is not new: Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, Google, AWS, have all been extending their reach into government for over a decade. Palantir is the boogey man right now, and it's under a lot of scrutiny because of its work and its political ties, but let's try turning some of the ire to all of the other tech companies empowering the government against people. The others shouldn't get a pass just because of their perceived political leanings.

It's essentially a duopoly that should be broken up.

But haven't people wanted NASA to be more streamlined, and efficient? Not sure if that is reducing staffing, or changing its mission. SpaceX making such leaps and bounds over NASA had to be a shot across the bow.

Needs a (2012) tag and you need an account to NEJM to access. Can't find it via PubMed etc.