And, they're not requiring that you lie, you're putting yourself in the position of violating the order by telling the truth, so you end up having to lie to stay out of jail. That's all on you! If you understand you can't disclose it, you're not imagining a fake "loophole." There is no loophole; doing a canary is actively disclosing; the lie you're telling is the original one where you promise to do the canary thing, even though you're not allowed to actually do it. When you later have to fail to keep the promise, that's all on you buddy.
But all of that said, if it is a scenario where the government is allowed to compel you to speak, there is no difference between compelling you to tell the truth or to tell a lie. They rarely can, but there are times it happens; a judge might sentence you to make some sort of public statement, and it doesn't matter at all if you think it is actually true, you'll still have to do it.
What the fuck, dude, you're bring up nazis just to say you're surprised I didn't know that you're also a nazi until you brought it up?
You're right, I had no idea, until I found out that you think being accused of being toxic, means you think I already also know you're a nazi. Now I know!
You even hate on that comedy movie staring some women, now I know. As for the incel part, my goodness, you won't go blind, just deal with your own needs then. Fuck-an-A.
Oh, poor baby, did your Freeze Peach melt? Waa, f'n waa.
There's no proof
Oh, shut the fuck up snowflake. When a business decides that some use of their servers is a problem, POW, now you know that they decided it is a problem. Proof? What the fuck are you talking about, Homer? Why would you set their standard of proof? You do know who you are, right? You do know you're not Rotten Tomatoes, right? Right?? So why the fuck do you think you'd set the standard of proof? Because you shouted "freeze peach?" That doesn't confer ownership.
Integral Trees was a romantic comedy, I'm truly surprised it hasn't become a blockbuster yet.
I guess they're scared to do romantic comedies that can be confused with sci-fi because of Heartbeeps. But that was their own fault; the trailer made it look like a sci-fi movie!
This was my thinking too; this is safety-critical stuff, and it only costs one IO pin and a transistor to do a hardware lockout based on the intended vehicle state. For a lockout when the wheel is in motion, they could use an op-amp for a timed delay. Making sure it is locked out at very low speed is hard, but if you're moving over 1 MPH it should be trivial to detect.
This attitude of, "oh goody, it is smaller than a car, so safety doesn't matter! Yeehah! Freedom Fries!" is just stupid.
You're supposed to think about what they said to see if it implies an obvious answer.
It says, "as part of an initiative to prevent identify theft and fraud."
So when you say, "even if I took the SIM out of the phone, I would still be under contact and have to pay" you're ignoring the basic premise that has already been provided. If you're not who you say you are, you're not under contract, you placed somebody else under apparent contract, and that is both why you wouldn't be motivated by the contract terms, and also why you're even doing it.
The benefit to the carrier is that they don't actually have a valid contract with the victim of identity theft, and in the end they're likely to take some sort of loss. This reduces that, by adding a fixed 2-month delay to being able to transfer and cash out a fraud-phone. Many of these frauds will be discovered within that window, and so will be mitigated.
Can they be trusted to do it? Well, it doesn't sound like you're going to get that far into the issue. lol
How would you know? If you've never done it, you don't know how it improved people's lives. Many people believe that "YeeHaw!" is the highest possible aspiration for life. Are you quite sure that whatever better thing that you apparently know about is better? And why aren't you doing it? And that's before even thinking about the engineering advancements and other externalities.
Humans are error prone and make emotional decisions that cost lives.
Who are you to spend my life? Let them invest their own lives as they see fit, at least until they ask you to decide for them.
You're not ready for Flash Gordon, you're not ready for Queen. You're just Another One Riding the Bus with Weird Al.
Read it again, and you're apparently not capable of differentiating between the concept of a thing and the actual thing.
You wave your hands and say, "Yes I can!" but you also keep waving your hands, and then contradict yourself. For example when you say, "Aha, it doesn't stop being what you created. But every viewer defines what it means to them." Whoopsie, you confuseded yourself there and forgot the difference between the specific things, and the concepts. Obviously if it doesn't stop being what it was, then the new meaning is a different thing; and physically that makes sense, since it is literally an electrochemical pattern inside your own darn head. Of course those feelies don't change anything external.
The viewer controls what the art means to them but that has nothing to do with the act of creation; and the art already existed before they looked at it. It is blatantly obvious that what the art means to the viewer is not the art itself, and does not impact what the art is.
And the flaccid logic doesn't stop there; you really go for broke with this idiocy: "why can you not simply conceptualize AI art as being one step removed from the actual handling of the brush?" Translation: You can see plainly that I'm wrong, why can't you just pretend that the words mean something different? But a better question you might have considered yourself would be, "Why would I?"
If you want to figure out if Clyfford Still is doing art, fine. If you like his art has nothing to do with the question. If his art speaks to you, or not, has nothing to do with the question. If you think it is good art or crap has nothing to do with the question. You have nothing to do with if Clyfford Still is an artist. The entire question comes down to: Did he create works that he says are art? Do you agree that he's being honest when he says it is his art? Done, art.
Or another situation. Say I imagine a photo I want to take, and I choreograph it, and have an assistant set up the camera and subject according to my instructions, and even press the button at the right time. Who created the art? I did. No controversy, that would be my art, not the assistant's art. Because I was the one with creative agency. This is consensus, not opinion, both in art and philosophy. In the same way, an AI can never be an artist; a creative programmer might write an AI creative assistant, but the artist would be human.
Whereas, if you wanted to know if Piano Cat is an artist, you'd have to ask Piano Cat. That's a much more difficult question than if an AI can be an artist.
And yet, nobody has any citations, because the experiment is still running.
Personally, I'm just glad that I refused in the first place because "No way in hell you need my phone's ID just to connect to a web service! No, no, and no!"
The zombies are no longer human. They used to be human. Blaming them doesn't actually mean that they can change back. Maybe some can. I'm not convinced.
Slashdot Mirror
They're not allowed to signal you in any way, so it is marketing.
When was that ever true?
And, they're not requiring that you lie, you're putting yourself in the position of violating the order by telling the truth, so you end up having to lie to stay out of jail. That's all on you! If you understand you can't disclose it, you're not imagining a fake "loophole." There is no loophole; doing a canary is actively disclosing; the lie you're telling is the original one where you promise to do the canary thing, even though you're not allowed to actually do it. When you later have to fail to keep the promise, that's all on you buddy.
But all of that said, if it is a scenario where the government is allowed to compel you to speak, there is no difference between compelling you to tell the truth or to tell a lie. They rarely can, but there are times it happens; a judge might sentence you to make some sort of public statement, and it doesn't matter at all if you think it is actually true, you'll still have to do it.
I'm not the one being or acting fucking stupid.
*****ROFLCOTPER*****
What the fuck, dude, you're bring up nazis just to say you're surprised I didn't know that you're also a nazi until you brought it up?
You're right, I had no idea, until I found out that you think being accused of being toxic, means you think I already also know you're a nazi. Now I know!
You even hate on that comedy movie staring some women, now I know. As for the incel part, my goodness, you won't go blind, just deal with your own needs then. Fuck-an-A.
Small dicks + raised as toxic macho assholes = army of neckbeards
Oh, poor baby, did your Freeze Peach melt? Waa, f'n waa.
There's no proof
Oh, shut the fuck up snowflake. When a business decides that some use of their servers is a problem, POW, now you know that they decided it is a problem. Proof? What the fuck are you talking about, Homer? Why would you set their standard of proof? You do know who you are, right? You do know you're not Rotten Tomatoes, right? Right?? So why the fuck do you think you'd set the standard of proof? Because you shouted "freeze peach?" That doesn't confer ownership.
Man you're fucking stupid.
If I want music, I just put AoA on repeat. Hyejeong forever!
Integral Trees was a romantic comedy, I'm truly surprised it hasn't become a blockbuster yet.
I guess they're scared to do romantic comedies that can be confused with sci-fi because of Heartbeeps. But that was their own fault; the trailer made it look like a sci-fi movie!
It was a pretty good roast, I enjoyed it. Better than your response, anyways.
Well, less animals being infected with disease might actually effect some populations.
Anybody know offhand what percent of lion kills are infected with a disease transmissible by mosquito?
Don't underestimate the danger of Otzi the Iceman cultists seeking revenge.
Did you ever wonder why Emperor Nero held a small party for a few close friends as much of the city was burning?
I mean, if history is instructive or not depends on if we understand it, not merely if we refer to it.
"NO! I'm NOT having an emergency! No, I didn't call for help. Stop stalking me!!!"
I so totally hope somebody sells you this feature. LMFAO
"Oh, it's just that guy in a SuperGrover costume with the smart watch again, false alarm." "... help... me... ...elp!"
That might not be how veins work. Or masturbation.
Would you be willing to take a moment and explain, for the purpose of education and curiosity, how your species does it?
This was my thinking too; this is safety-critical stuff, and it only costs one IO pin and a transistor to do a hardware lockout based on the intended vehicle state. For a lockout when the wheel is in motion, they could use an op-amp for a timed delay. Making sure it is locked out at very low speed is hard, but if you're moving over 1 MPH it should be trivial to detect.
This attitude of, "oh goody, it is smaller than a car, so safety doesn't matter! Yeehah! Freedom Fries!" is just stupid.
Yeah I know how Lime works - and it's insecure, and leads to software problems.
Are we sure about cause and effect here? If my software had this sort of problem, I'd feel insecure too! Maybe they just know it is a shit design?
You're supposed to think about what they said to see if it implies an obvious answer.
It says, "as part of an initiative to prevent identify theft and fraud."
So when you say, "even if I took the SIM out of the phone, I would still be under contact and have to pay" you're ignoring the basic premise that has already been provided. If you're not who you say you are, you're not under contract, you placed somebody else under apparent contract, and that is both why you wouldn't be motivated by the contract terms, and also why you're even doing it.
The benefit to the carrier is that they don't actually have a valid contract with the victim of identity theft, and in the end they're likely to take some sort of loss. This reduces that, by adding a fixed 2-month delay to being able to transfer and cash out a fraud-phone. Many of these frauds will be discovered within that window, and so will be mitigated.
Can they be trusted to do it? Well, it doesn't sound like you're going to get that far into the issue. lol
Where do you humans think you are going?
Up. And then back down, hopefully.
Better spent improving life here
How would you know? If you've never done it, you don't know how it improved people's lives. Many people believe that "YeeHaw!" is the highest possible aspiration for life. Are you quite sure that whatever better thing that you apparently know about is better? And why aren't you doing it? And that's before even thinking about the engineering advancements and other externalities.
Humans are error prone and make emotional decisions that cost lives.
Who are you to spend my life? Let them invest their own lives as they see fit, at least until they ask you to decide for them.
You're not ready for Flash Gordon, you're not ready for Queen. You're just Another One Riding the Bus with Weird Al.
I can haz rocket? I can haz science?
I can haz engineering??
I can haz big NASA hat too???
No. Bad kitty. Stay off keyboard.
Seemingly there is no reason for these extraordinary intergalactical upsets
Only Doctor Hans Zarkhov, formerly at NASA, has provided any explanation
This morning's unprecedented solar eclipse is no cause for alarm
"Flash, Flash, I love you, but we only have fourteen hours to save the Earth!"
Read it again, and you're apparently not capable of differentiating between the concept of a thing and the actual thing.
You wave your hands and say, "Yes I can!" but you also keep waving your hands, and then contradict yourself. For example when you say, "Aha, it doesn't stop being what you created. But every viewer defines what it means to them." Whoopsie, you confuseded yourself there and forgot the difference between the specific things, and the concepts. Obviously if it doesn't stop being what it was, then the new meaning is a different thing; and physically that makes sense, since it is literally an electrochemical pattern inside your own darn head. Of course those feelies don't change anything external.
The viewer controls what the art means to them but that has nothing to do with the act of creation; and the art already existed before they looked at it. It is blatantly obvious that what the art means to the viewer is not the art itself, and does not impact what the art is.
And the flaccid logic doesn't stop there; you really go for broke with this idiocy: "why can you not simply conceptualize AI art as being one step removed from the actual handling of the brush?" Translation: You can see plainly that I'm wrong, why can't you just pretend that the words mean something different? But a better question you might have considered yourself would be, "Why would I?"
If you want to figure out if Clyfford Still is doing art, fine. If you like his art has nothing to do with the question. If his art speaks to you, or not, has nothing to do with the question. If you think it is good art or crap has nothing to do with the question. You have nothing to do with if Clyfford Still is an artist. The entire question comes down to: Did he create works that he says are art? Do you agree that he's being honest when he says it is his art? Done, art.
Or another situation. Say I imagine a photo I want to take, and I choreograph it, and have an assistant set up the camera and subject according to my instructions, and even press the button at the right time. Who created the art? I did. No controversy, that would be my art, not the assistant's art. Because I was the one with creative agency. This is consensus, not opinion, both in art and philosophy. In the same way, an AI can never be an artist; a creative programmer might write an AI creative assistant, but the artist would be human.
Whereas, if you wanted to know if Piano Cat is an artist, you'd have to ask Piano Cat. That's a much more difficult question than if an AI can be an artist.
And yet, nobody has any citations, because the experiment is still running.
Personally, I'm just glad that I refused in the first place because "No way in hell you need my phone's ID just to connect to a web service! No, no, and no!"
The zombies are no longer human. They used to be human. Blaming them doesn't actually mean that they can change back. Maybe some can. I'm not convinced.
"I don't understand it, therefore it is impwossibul!" --iggmanz
In a small city, more people died in car crashes today.
There are billions of people in the world. If you're upset by 3 deaths, turn off the internet, unplug everything, and drop off the grid.
That's what they get for buying a plane from a supplier with co-mingled inventory.