it's a toe in the water type of thing.. Less to lose while theatres are empty, no commitments for when they pick up again
"movies will only appear on HBO Max for a month before they disappear"
what purpose could this possibly serve other than being a nuisance?
They are running a probability based guessing game round to infinity times. Their goal is matching correctly "often" and potentially improve that percentage over time, not to match correctly always. They should expect every possible mismatch of tags to come up. They should be looking at each of their tags and thinking "what's the worst that could happen" because it will
Eliminating any problematic tags seems like the best solution for me.
"Will AI ever be able to surmount the inherent biases fed into it by those designing and training it?"
Not sure it matters when you do this sort of this at a basically infinite scale and your AI is never going to be perfect, you should assume you will eventually get every combination of mistaken matches out there. It doesn't matter if there is any inherent bias or not, the AI could have no bias, be nearly perfect and the majority of mistaken matches could be innocuous and it wouldn't help you any when you hit a bad one.
I think if you can identify which tags are going to be incredibly offensive and make you look terrible, removing them as options is a perfectly fine solution.
The only reasonable conclusion is that they simply just don't Senator Thom Tillis seriously
It's a bit less polarized, but it's definately got it's own problems. those big examples I mentioned are mostly only theoretically possible, but really unlikely but you do get occasional traitors members of parliament where they were elected as a conservative and then later have a falling out and decided to defect to the liberals or visa versa. People get really pissed when that happens.
Deciding whether or not to do work for someone doesn't control speech. Not doing something for someone is not the same as preventing them from doing it
We have first past the post as well, but we don't really elect the PM directly like you do the pres, we elect individual parliament members who vote on decisions, and whoever gets the most parliament members gets to decide who they want to lead their crew. We can have something happen like the cons get 45% of parliament and the libs get 35% and the ndp gets 20% the libs and ndp decide to join together to gain majority and nominate a P.M. between them, or we can have something like the liberal party once elected can decide the guy they picked as P.M. is terrible and replace him. So losing a parliament seat here or there to NDP or green party is a bigger deal and can actually affect the balance of power
This was kindof the role that Trump played in 2016 I think except now there is no more republican party to go back to after they have been suitably chastised
You know, the punish the main parties party.. Gotta have one of those
It doesn't matter about their policies as long as they are a third choice so when the other two get too cocky and think you can't do anything about it you can vote for them to get them back in line
This is what the New Democratic Party is for once a decade or so when the liberals and conservatives get too out of control people can vote NDP and they will smarten up by the next election... Don't you guys have an NDP party?
Shot someone? you are thinking too small! Things would have to get far far worse than that to make his hardcore people change their minds.. I'm thinking move to Russia and accept a top position in Putin's gov't :)
If you are going to shut down the government, make sure you lay off half the people first so the government can't function anyway, then when you shut it down it's not as big a deal.
More like that time is now. Hosting your own crap is no harder than before, and someone not doing the work for you is hardly censorship. How about a return to the day when companies decided how they serve their customers without it having to be a bullshit conspiracy theory? When if people thought they could do it better than a company they put up or shut up
Anyone think he will get bad enough before Jan 20 to the point where a significant number of his supporters in the public will blink? Maybe in his own way he is working to patch the divide!
You kids and your newfangled games with ends! Games should just repeat forever and get harder until run out of quarters!
What is "this model"? There doesn't seem to be anything particularly different about GTAV milking a good game for as long as you can with continual updates has been around a lot longer than gtaV.. Valve has been milking halflife forever Adding DLC and/or free features supported by microtransations to extend your game's lifetime has been done in basically every modern game out there too. Doing this for a long time I don't think is really new either.. They will do it until it dries up, the better the game the longer they can milk it. GTA 6 will come out eventually
I'll say the trend isn't new
The game isn't around anymore but I used to play one of the many many muds out there called Majic Realm, they charged a monthly fee as well as an exorbitant hourly one if you went over time, had several developers (whom the players all knew) who constantly worked full time on expanding the game itself as well and running events..
Believe it lasted longer than 7 years as well
Re: Re:
Ahh I didn't think of the second point, that at least is potentially a legitimate reason I think, although I'm not sure they aren't just going to trade those single unit subscribers for 0 unit subscribers.