You'd need a similar law around posting AI photos/videos without disclosure. Which maybe is where we're heading.
It still won't prevent it, but it would prevent large players from doing it.
17,081 karma · joined May 14, 2013
Revenue focused web analytics to help you quickly identify where to focus your effort to best increase revenue.
It still won't prevent it, but it would prevent large players from doing it.
I don't see how it would defeat the cat and mouse game.
You can say he refuses to compromise, but clearly so does the other side, hence the impasse.
> Or you could end up getting margin called
That's not how puts work. The premium you shelled out when you bought them is your maximum loss. You won't get margin called if you paid cash.
Unlike shorts the losses are limited, but you also have to time it correctly. Theta decay hurts.
Fixed down side, upside is $100 per contract per dollar the stock is below the strike at expiry. You can also sell them before then, and price depends on time to expiry, volatility, and distance to the strike price. See Black-Scholes model for more info.
If you have a better measure, share it. I trust data more than your or my feelings on the matter.
I’ve made that mistake already.
I’m nervous about the economic data and the sky high valuations, but I’ll invest with the trend until the trend changes.
Nowhere near that level. There’s real demand and real revenue this time.
It won’t grow as fast as investors expect, which makes it a bubble if I’m right about that. But not comparable to the dotcom bubble. Not yet anyway.
Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them. And that can change over time.
Sentiment matters more than fundamental value in the short term.
Long term, on a timescale of a decade or more, it’s different.
That's capital markets working as intended. It's not necessarily doomed to end in a fiery crash, although corrections along the way are a natural part of the process.
It seems very bubbly to me, but not dotcom level bubbly. Not yet anyway. Maybe we're in 1998 right now.
The aim is to be compatible with sqlite, and a drop-in replacement for it, so I think it's fair use.
> Also, this is a VC backed project. Everyone has to eat, but I suspect that Turso will not go out of its way to offer a Public Domain offering or 50 year support in the way that SQLite has.
It's MIT license open-source. And unlike sqlite, encourages outside contribution. For this reason, I think it can "win".
It has async I/O support on Linux with io_uring, vector support, BEGIN CONCURRENT for improved write throughput using multi-version concurrency control (MVCC), Encryption at rest, incremental computation using DBSP for incremental view maintenance and query subscriptions.
Time will tell, but this may well be the future of SQLite.
History is littered with the literal bones of people who thought they had nothing to fear from the state. The state is not your friend, and is not looking out for you.
Then all you have to do is get Claude to visit it. I’m sure people will find hundreds of creative ways to achieve that.
If they gave a loan or a credit card to someone pretending to be me. That’s now on my credit rating and historically very difficult to undo.
That doesn't rule out one happening in the future, but why now? It's such a weak argument.
It seems to me a parallel path that should be pursued is to make the impact less damaging. Don't assume that things like birth dates, names, addresses, phone numbers, emails, SSNs, etc are private. Shut down the avenues that people use to "steal identities".
I hate the term stealing identity, because it implies the victim made some mistake to allow it to happen. When what really happened is the company was lazy to verify that the person they're doing business with is actually who they say they are. The onus and liability should be on the company involved. If a bank gives a loan to you under my name, it should be their problem, not mine. It would go away practically overnight as a problem if that were changed. Companies would be strict about verifying people, because otherwise they'd lose money. Incentives align.
Identify theft is not the only issue with data leaks / breaches, but it seems one of the more tractable.
Do you understand fog of war? Both sides say things that are false or exaggerated, and it's difficult to discern the truth because information is censored and journalists are restricted in their movement and what they can report. This not unique to this conflict, you see the same thing in the Russia-Ukraine war, and in the recent Thailand Cambodia skirmishes.
I don't trust what either side says, I assume the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
One of the more balanced and accurate sources, in my opinion, has been Preston Stewart on Youtube[1], especially on the Russia-Ukraine war. He sources things frequently from military bloggers from both sides in their native language and verifies what he can and is honest about what is unconfirmed.
There are really only those two options.
Time will tell. But they’re not that stupid. I don’t think they’re that evil too, but I don’t have to be right about that.