It is kind of wild to see the AI call out its own weaknessesIt's not wild at all. You asked it to critique a block of text (that it previously generated the block of text is irrelevant, it doesn't know that and it wouldn't care if it did). All its doing is predicting the sorts of words that appear in critiques of things. It has no ability to make value judgements, it just apes what judgement looks like. Go ahead. Feed it Shakespeare (or whatever writing you find most unimpeachable) and it will happily dunk on it all day long. Actually, better suggestion. Go ahead and feed it the worst TechDirt article ever written, the one you hate the most. I bet the criticism will look more or less the same.
Why is Benj Edwards the one we are supposed to feel bad for? Would he be more or less sympathetic if he hadn't used ChatGPT at all and just made something up entirely in his own mind? "I was sick and there was a tight deadline so I just published lies." doesn't feel like an understandable failure really. In this AI-content-filled future we are finding ourselves in it's quickly going to be apparent that humans are not necessary for creating stuff, but they will be more necessary than ever for being responsible for what kinds of stuff is produced.
How about a penalty of perjury?
I read the transcript, and Ms. Le should (have) know(n) better. It's her professional job to know better. That is what lawyers are for. If you cannot cajole your client into complying with the court then at some point you, yourself, become complicit in their failure. As terrible a position as she is in, she put herself there by continuing to work for ICE and she actively continues to make her own situation worse by not throwing her clients under the bus.
The problem is not enough fall guys are falling fast enough that other potential fall guys might have second thoughts about doing so. I am completely unsympathetic to lawyers who cannot make this happen. If your client does not listen to the court's instructions and goes rogue you should not work for them. You should report to the court who is responsible for not following their instructions and inform the bailiff where and when they can be picked up for incarceration.
That sounds like more of a problem with the Discords you and your small friend groups make. I, for one, really liked the ability to make small semi-private spaces for close-knit groups. I hope that whatever replaces Discord has that ability because I don't want to be forced into giant channels moving the speed of Twitch chat where nobody knows your name and nobody cares what you think.
OR an international airport! Don't forget those!
Let's Go Bhutan!
The fun part about denying people rights when they just so happen to magically enter a No Rights Zone is that their right to contest any involuntary transmission into said zone disappears too!
The remedy is you release them. This is the same question as "we illegally searched your house/car and found drugs". The faulty search voids the conviction and the person goes free, even if they were exactly the drug dealer the state accused them of being. Of course, in this case, virtually none of these people are being convicted of any crimes so there's really nothing to overturn and the state isn't going to release them because it's a fascist shit twinkie, so the real remedy is "try to survive until the next election".
Why? No one is ever going to cite this ruling. There's no citation required for "bullshit stinks". If someone wants to go to Court B and try a lawsuit without any of the things that a lawsuit requires, then you don't write a 69-page thesis on how they already got tossed from Court A for trying that. Playing this game with them is giving them entirely too much deference.
Something feels off about courts taking more time and page space to rebut nonsense than is required to create it. I look forward to when the judicial response is just "LOL NO".
“C.I.A. is not the Library of Congress,” Ms. Sanner said with a laugh. “The intelligence community shouldn’t be your librarian.”Mr. Sanner is a dumbass. The CIA World Factbook is a useful piece of information for the CIA, that also happens to be something for which there is no reason to classify it. It's just basic information about various countries in the world. Not secret stuff, just the basic surface level Random Country 101 every good intelligence officer dealing with a country should have memorized before doing any work related to it. So we bring ourselves to a question. Is the CIA still creating and maintaining this information, but hiding it? If so, why? Nothing in the factbook was worth hiding. If it's not still creating and maintaining this information source internally, why not? Isn't that what a good Central Intelligence Agency should be doing?
This Trump administration is working double time to find all the waste, fraud, and abuse it can... and get a cut for itself!
Thirty-three-year-old Thomas Jefferson enumerated grievances against a would-be authoritarian king over our nascent nation. Among others were:Someone should put the Declaration of Independence on the wall of the Oval Office to remind Trump of what it says :^) :^^) :^^^) :^^^^^^^^^^^^^)
And when they do, they’re going to discover that the employees they’re trying to recruit remember what happened.The old, feeble, high-cost low-output ones will anyway. The bright-eyed kids rolling out of college and willing to burn the candle at both ends will have no idea. Same as it ever was.
"Context and situation matters" Proceeds to make a false comparison with a totally different situation under a totally different contextThere is a special badge that lets you barge into people's houses (with a warrant). There is no special badge that lets you be a journalist. Everyone can do that. Journalism doesn't allow you to break other laws, but that's not what's happening here. That is transparently not what is happening here. Everyone with at least one eyeball can see the government is punishing two journalists for covering something they don't like.
If you can find fault in any of the above, tell me what that would be in the comments.Here's the major problem that will never be fixed no matter how many signatures you get: You can't legislate that a defunct company with no employees do software development. The end result isn't that games must be "left" in that state so much as they must "initially" be in that state before they can legally be sold because after that point, at virtually a moments notice, the developer can cease to be. Further, the penalties are absolutely toothless. You can't extract penalties from a defunct company. So what is it going to be? Is there going to be a demand that games sold in Europe must conform to a set of rules before sale and then never release patches which may fundamentally alter the state of that already sold game? Or is there going to be some kind of financial "bond" that must be secured by the state to preemptively account for penalties which might be paid in the future if the developer at some point violates the rules before (or after) going out of business? This is some prime grade "we must do something, this is something, ergo we must do this".
Oh. Strikethrough works now. It's not in the Markup. Boy do I feel silly now.
Ah yes. 3d printed guns. The menace of our society. Is anyone even bothering to gather statistics on how many violent crimes are committed with 3D printed guns? I found some weasely stats on "3d printed guns found at crime scenes" which is just about the most evasive statistic name imaginable right next to "officer involved shooting" but even that is so vanishingly low that it warrants no attention. I'd be willing to bet that more violent crime is perpetrated with 200 year old smooth-bore muskets than 3d printed guns.