If you think a little pessimistically, it's easy to see how they want people to just trust the answers they get, without any sources. Then, once they trust it, they can modify it as it benefits them (framing answers to promote products/ads, changing history to whatever a particular government may want it to say, etc.)
Are people so obsessed with AI that they can't find it reasonable that it won't do obviously bad things if asked? Not even with a confirmation or warning? We trust AI to literally build products and fix our most critical bugs, but we can't expect it to tell when it's being asked to do something malicious? Imagine if we felt this way about QA when trying DROP TABLES; in search bars. "Oh, well of course it broke the database, the user asked it to!"
I swear the only the people who care about Python types are on Hacker News comments. I've never actually worked with or met someone who cared so much about it, and the ones that care at all seem just fine with type hints.
The article wasn't about the outage happening, it was about the amount of time it took to even discover what the problem was. Seems logical to assume that could be because there aren't many people left who know how all the systems connect.
That defeats the whole point of this issue. These uses are fair use, they shouldn't have to license anything. You can't teach music without playing it, Youtube is just allowing rights holders to make claims without any evidence or punishment for being wrong.
Have to agree. I've tried multiple times to replace my. edison FiOS router with different Edgerouters and none of them have been able to compare to the Gigabit speeds I get with the Verizon router. I'm not even using wifi, just want a simple router with a firewall and port forwarding that can compare to my $12/mo one from Verizon. I troubleshooted each for a eeek tweaking hardware acceleration and other knobs, but they couldn't keep up. I think people don't compare and test and just assume it's just as good, but it isn't.
Eh, part of assessing the vulnerability is how deep it goes. Showing that there were no gates or roadblocks to accessing all the data is a valid thing to research, otherwise they can later say "oh we hade rate limiting in place" or "we had network vulnerability scanners which would've prevented a wholesale leak".
Would be worth adding this as an FAQ on the page. Great job btw.
EDIT: Would also be really cool to define what each field means, if you're gonna reimplement everything anyways, why not make it as user friendly as possible.
Yes, Kurt falls into the "obviously knows music theory without knowing what things are called". He played by ear and had a gift for melody and chord tones. Rick Beato has great videos about Nirvana and Kurt's very sophisticated ear - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l1ZnWc-sFd0&pp=ygUNYmVhdG8gbml...
Agreed, I wanted to write the whole article off after that suggestion. That is such a terrible anti pattern that would confuse everyone who looked at it, even people with decades of experience.
We really couldn't get the name of the person whose face has been accidentally in a movie that's part of one of the great pieces of pop culture on modern history? Was really more interested to know who it was, what exactly he was doing, and what he thinks about it.
The fact that the data showed only 6% of Metal songs having power chords should've told him to throw the data out the window. UG has terrible tabs/charts.
They gained it back by basically giving Teams away for free and getting companies to say "we're already paying for this bundle, so let's stop paying for Zoom/Slack." They still missed out on billions which they'll try to claim back over years of slow price raises (until the competition lowers prices and/or becomes more competitive).
You may think Google cares about your performance but when the involuntary layoffs come, it's the highest earners who are first cut. Google is hoping the high earners leave because that saves the most money. There is no long/term thought here, it's short-sighted stock bumps from a company already rolling in money.
"Boost voices" is a cool feature a lot of apps have, but what is really needed is a "compress voices" feature. So many podcasters speak loudly 75% of the time, but then trail off randomly or almost whisper. Then you turn it up and they're projecting loudly again and blow your ears out. It's especially annoying in the car trying to compete with road noise.
Many people no longer pirate because of how inconvenient and risky it is. It's not so simple to find a private tracker invite that you trust, use a VPN, find the quality you want, etc. One email from your ISP threatening to cancel your service is enough to scare people off. I think you greatly underestimate how much effort has gone into to anti-piracy, and how well it has worked.