6,051 karma · joined October 22, 2015
I've been online since circa 1995 (earlier if you count BBSs), and I can't say I did. It's possible to infer its meaning but assuming everyone is on the same circles as one is, is silly.
Don't tell me they were not aware of the risks when they've been at the forefront of the AI doom discourse. It's very hard to not put blame on them.
Correct.
> But this, is going against that, this is saying, "why should we ban AI or gun when they can be used for both good and bad. What we want is to ban bad, regardless of how it is achieved"
Not at all. I'm saying regulations do that and they are a good thing. Not everybody can own an assault rifle. Some of the people who can, are not allowed to carry it on the streets. Police will have very different regulations towards their gun use. The army, another set of regulations. The list goes on. Even in countries who have lax gun laws, usually not all guns are allowed to everyone in all situations. No one is allowed to carry a nuke into a shopping centre.
Note that regulating and banning are very different things. I don't think you can fully ban guns or AI.
Regulating gun ownership is exactly regulating the application.
In your analogy, the gun is the AI. What you can do with the gun is the application.
Different actors with different credentials in different contexts will have different requirements and permissions of what they can do with the technology, be it a gun or AI.
Even though I've spoken fluent English for decades, it's still only my second language and I'm always learning new things about it!
Personally I had never thought of "smart home" as a compound word, but rather as a qualifier and a noun. It's a home that happens to be smart. Similar to "blue sky", or "hot dishes". In my mind neither of those would be hyphenated.
It's different from "man-eating", since that's not an eating that happens to be man, so in fact the whole word only makes sense as a unit in any sentence that would use it.
Clearly, I need to adapt my understanding! :)
Thanks for the tip on second hand, I might have a look.
A bunch of Matter-over-Thread devices I have: hard to secure. I'll end up setting up a Thread Border Router on my IoT VLAN and get HA to connect to it, but that means yet another component to run separate from HA, which requires its own upgrade mechanism, backup, etc.
Matter-over-WiFi: haven't yet found one that would fit what I need. Will require expanding my IoT WiFi network to other parts of the house. My main APs don't serve IoT because a few tens of those would easily congest the radios, despite being very low bandwidth.
Most devices are PIR-only, or use subpar mmWave sensors, or a combination of both which tends to be hit-and-miss.
I haven't found a device that doesn't require a proprietary app for setup, which means tracking and the risk of them becoming e-waste.
I'm planning to build some out of cheap sensors from AliExpress and ESP32s but I haven't had the time and have too many other projects in flight.
The cheapest Hue option is a 4-pack of Hue Essential for £63. That would be 9 of those for £567 in light bulbs for the ground floor alone.
Smart light bulbs are another minefield of low-CRI, bad connectivity, worse firmwares, nerfed local featureset, etc.
It's already a requirement that to operate in Brazil they need local representation. Someone local who can be prosecuted, even if it's just a proxy - I'm hazy on the details but I remember reading about this at one point when they went after Twitter.
Is it going to fully stop Brazilians from using the service? Most likely not, but it will almost certainly reduce their usage, and the remaining users become a less profitable product to Meta, since they're not going to see ads for companies they can actually spend money on.
This changes incentives and may well be enough to make Meta rethink their policies. Or not, but then its effects can be measured and adjusted.
Brazil is not a "little corporation with a fancy flag". Brazil is a democratic republic. The largest in Latin America, and one of the largest in the world.
Sure, that way you don't get utility from it, so the next best thing is to actually restrict what it can do. If you don't, especially when you know it can do bad things, it's on you for having run it.
In 2018 the president was indeed Michel Temer, who was Dilma Roussef's vice-president. Temer led a coup against his President.
In any case, Temer was opposition to Lula and Dilma's Worker's Party so the main point stands.
The so called "bets" were authorised to operate in Brazil in 2018 via law 13.756/2018, in the first year of Jair Bolsonaro's presidency.
Jair Bolsonaro, who was found guilty of Federal crimes and is paying his sentence under house arrest due to frail health, is the father of Flávio Bolsonaro, main adversary of incumbent President Lula da Silva.
So it is in fact the opposite of what you described.
I don't think your examples apply though. The dog example is just dog meaning sausage, sometimes with a temperature quality added (or ignored), but always a sausage with no other connotations.
The pepper one, maybe a little, though according to Etymonline [0] pep is short for pepper, so it's all the same really.
So you're telling me that a word which has "slop" in its origins is itself the origin of "slop"?
This must be the first case of circular etymology!