Re: It's more than hoses
And? You don't need to actually fly to figure any of this out. You can do it in a conference room.
660 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Feb 2010
Please go study "innuendo" and "plausible deniability". It was the same sort of speech that the Orange Man always uses, weasely double-talk that from the strictest reading wasn't anything bad. But to anyone with actual sense is painfully obvious what was going on. It's Budget Mafiosi stuff, like all the rest of his act.
How many different parameters, permissions, and properties need to be set to restrict access to a certain thing, though? Which ones apply to which? Which ones interact to cancel each other out and allow access anyway?
The first job of AI is to find all the places that access management is fucked up. That's it.
What a crock of shite.
Recall is a solution in search of a problem. The author is trying to find a problem. The more obvious one would be, "How do I automate the process of stealing every bit of IP my company has?"
It isn't secure. It can't be made secure. If it could be, the number of data breaches would be declining. They are accelerating at an accelerating pace.
The only way to prevent data being stolen is to make sure it's never collected in the first place. The author needs to be collected and put into detox, until they have all of the Kool-Aid out of their system.
Way to prove you didn't read the articles.
The first is quite plain if you bother to think critically about it.
1) Police are reviewing claims of election fraud they have received relating to "concerns around marketing material".
2) It comes after the Conservative candidate for High Peak in Derbyshire, Robert Largan, put out a social media post on Saturday in red Labour colours saying "Labour for Largan".
3) The Conservative Party said: “The materials clearly carry imprints, as required by electoral law."
So claims are being reviewed. The police have not said WHOSE marketing material is under investigation, but there is word there is one taking place. Robert Largan says he has not been contacted about it. That's it.
The second is the same.
"Right and far-right parties are set to make gains, but the picture is widely different across the continent."
And then it goes on to explore various concerns in a selection of the countries within the EU. Come on, now.
I would posit that the switch from typewriters to computers let you do the same thing the same way but better.
Mechanical linkage to electronics, the action of fingers to keys is the same.
So that doesn't really hit for me the same as saying, "We can replace this entire orchestra with a fondleslab."
As someone that was on a criminal trial to completion as a jurist, I can assure you that they do.
It may be in some certain situations, like how there can be a bench trial or jury trial. But where I am, at the county level the jury deliberates guilt, then sentencing within the guidelines. The judge can overrule, but if not grossly outside the provided range it stands.
To turn it the other way, did you just say "You should pay us money, even though we don't keep your private or payment information the slightest bit safe, and are looking into how we can sell it to drug makers without getting sued out of existence,"?
We wouldn't tolerate this from a store, you need to show cause on why we should tolerate it from facilities where we go when things actually are a matter of life and death.
Hi. As a human, I can understand, "Pedestrian was hit and propelled into the path of another vehicle." And I will bloody well see it happen. And I know to stop, check, see if I can reverse off them.
Not, you know, pull to the side while dragging them beneath. This is all basic kinematics and object persistence.
I hope not. The concept that, "The microphone that has the input at the highest amplitude s probably the closest and therefore the correct one" is classified as Fucking Duh, and should not be patentable. And no, nifty bits about normalizing and going between different mics doesn't make it novel. That's called calibration, and should be done in any device that provides amplitude.
Why does Sweden have some of the lowest excess mortality? They weren't idiots like USandians. They actually listened to their government, took some precautions, got vaccinated. The US? Much more scared of needles than guns.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/30/opinion/sweden-pandemic-coronavirus.html
The CDC said that when the size of the particles that transmitted the virus wasn't properly understood. Cloth masks helped. But they were not as effective as surgical masks, which were not as effective as N95 masks. If you had been paying attention, you would have seen the studies going on about propagation and droplet size and airflow modeling, trying to get a grip on the actual dynamics.
And you overlook the fact that people are not horses. Their weights are different. Their digestive systems are different. The actual composition of other ingredients in the doses are different.
Ivermectin basically is meant to be a dose big enough kill the parasites but hopefully not kill the host. How many influencers did we lose to Ivermectin, again?
Idiot.
If the rules said, "Any Device" and not "Any Camera", then either an organizer screwed up royally or this lad is just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame.
A photography competition should involve taken photographs. There should be nothing that comes out in that photo that did not go into the camera. Multiple exposure tricks count. Adjusting coloration and balance is fine. Painting in an AI generated skyline is a ban, because it did not go through the camera ostensibly used to take the photos. Skylum is trying to slip this kind of thing into Luminar, and I do not approve of it at all.
It's really so much simpler than Mr Look At Me was trying to make it seem.
Yes and no.
Acquaint yourself with the concept of "perjury".
Lawyers can talk, unless under oath. And anything submitted in writing is typically sworn to. Hazards of violation include censure and loss of license to practice law.
Which is why a certain spate of court cases in 2020 sounded and resolved very differently in court than the braggadocio heard outside it.
In other words, it was created by folks that were afraid "the government was out to get them", and didn't anticipate that also meaning "the government won't save them".
I seem to remember a few smart contract exploits that drained funds. And since the way they set it up was they were legal contracts... those independent-minded souls had no actual valid recourse.
You're so close to getting it. So very close...
To being complete and utter bullshit.
"Read both sides of a story and make up their minds." Oh wow, you must not be at all familiar with the "bury them in lies and propaganda" strategy that's been running for the past... oh, at least 30 years. Either wise up or stop trying to pretend to be so stupid. Shutting the flow of lies to a trickle isn't censorship, it's flow control.
Twitter's applied the ToS inconsistently, all right. They should have been banning a lot of right-wing nutcases MUCH SOONER. But didn't. So there you are.
Nobody with a brain missed Elton's hypocrisy, it screamed from the rooftops. There's no concern for safety. They made shit up. Proof: Said journalists are back on Twitter just as fast as there were off it. There's no weight to it, just a capricious owner with poor emotional and impulse control.