Hacksaw

joined 1 year ago
[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

US government gutted manufacturing? Last I checked companies chasing endless profit did that. Then when the government tried to stop them they used their money and power to elect a government that let them outsource US jobs to China. They've been rolling in money ever since.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago

This is exactly what Disney is trying to do by throwing an ex employee under the bus.

If people's lives depend on your systems, and your systems can be undermined by a single person and not caught for years, then you're playing with people's lives.

Secondly, even if this was the case, how could they possibly justify trying to get out of being accountable by saying she signed away her rights by using a free month of Disney+?

This is just Disney moving on to their next bullshit excuse to not pay after the first one didn't work.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is in comparison to private corporations who have a profit incentive to monetize your data in every disgusting abusive way possible. Companies with a fiduciary duty to exploit every possible potential for profit or they can be sued by shareholders? Companies that aren't publicly auditable so you'll never know who they're sharing your data with? Like the recent trend of cars selling your location data to your insurance company who then uses it to hike your rates?

You're comparing a government who has to be bribed or break a law in order to share your data at all with corporations who have a duty to sell it to the highest bidder. And in this comparison your conclusion is it's the government that you can't trust?

Sorry, I have to say I'm completely baffled by your statements right now.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

That's true, but the government is auditable by citizens though. We can legislate them to not keep logs and most importantly we can see if they're sharing data with advertisers.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

This is the right way to protect privacy. Auditable government departments have your data anyways. They don't provide the data to companies, but they answer questions like "old enough to drink?" With yes no answers.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If your phone is in a Faraday bag how would you get phone calls?

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago

You can sue for anything. I can sue you for trespassing in my home because your message is in it right now. Suing someone doesn't mean you're right or that you even have grounds to sue.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 month ago (3 children)

If you already know the answer you can tell the AI the answer as part of the question and it'll give you the right answer.

That's what you sound like.

AI people are as annoying as the Musk crowd.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago

I think it's desktop only, but I rarely use the mobile brave app.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah 0- 49% is an F 50-59 is a D 60-69 is a C 70-79 is a B 80-89 is an A 90-100 is an A+

It means that 10-20% of exams and assignments can be used to really challenge students without unfairly affecting grades of those who meet curriculum expectations.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago

If you miss key information the summary is useless.

If the structure of the code is bad then using that boilerplate will harm your ability to maintain the code FOREVER.

There are use cases for it, but it has to be used by someone who understands the task and knows the outcome they're looking for. It can't replace any measure of skill just yet, but it behaves as if it can which is hazardous.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

47% is a fail. 81% is an A-... Sure the AI can fail faster than a human can succeed, but I can fail to run a marathon faster than an athlete can succeed.

I guess by the standards we use to judge AI I'm a marathon runner!

view more: next ›