Please understand that ChatGPT was released in November 2022.
And also understand that the distinction between chess and ChatGPT is the point of the comment. These two things both use AI but one is harmless and useful while the other is not.
Exactly right. That is the distinction I’m trying to draw.
Chess engines have been using AI, specifically, neural networks, for years before ChatGPT or other LLMs. Nobody complained.
There are plenty of people filing individual cases as well alleging liability under product liability law.
The sheer volume of those cases could possibly cause major financial issues for the company even if each one costs only a relatively small amount.
The short, general summary of these cases is that under US consumer protection law, the maker of a product is strictly liable for injuries and damages caused by the defective design of that product. An example in ordinary circumstances is that a farmer who uses an herbicide that contains a toxic chemical, and then later develops cancer as a result of exposure to that chemical, can claim compensation from the manufacturer under product liability law. This is what drove the chemical company Monsanto (maker of Roundup) into bankruptcy facing billions in product liability claims.
So a teenager who uses Facebook and then develops mental disorders as a result of that use, has a personal injury claim against Meta.
Even if each individual case is only worth around $20,000 to $50,000, Facebook has hundreds of millions of users in the US, of which possibly hundreds of thousands of people could have a valid claim under this legal theory. And many people could claim a great deal more in compensation. If a person uses Facebook, becomes addicted, gets depression as a result, and then commits suicide, that is potentially a wrongful death claim worth hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars.
Ambulance chasers to the rescue!
It’s about 2% of their annual net revenue per year for ten years. Hardly much of a punishment.
I’m not a big fan of Steve Bannon, but I think what he said about political power is among the truest things ever said about modern politics. These big corporations, they’re not so tough. The big law firms? They’re not so tough. But the state can be tough. They’re all gutless cowards at the end of the day that would crumble if even a fraction of the power available was displayed. If one truly takes power and exercises it, that would become apparent. Trying to play nice gets you nothing but lip service and pocket change.
Well, at least we can agree on that lol. I hate Luckin Coffee
Never been to Luckin Coffee I see
Also there is no such thing as karma on Lemmy
The places I’ve been to either allow you to pay cash at the counter or they have a machine that accepts cash.
I never understood why console players always get so worked up about exclusives. People say the stupidest most absolutely nonsensical things like “the PS5 has no games”. What the hell do you mean?? The PS5 has lots of games, you’re just salty that other people can play those games too. Why can’t people just be happy that more people can enjoy the games? They have to have that feeling of superiority I suppose
I doubt the person who drew this comic has had the misfortune of trying to order food in China. It’s basically a literal form of what the comic is poking fun of, and it’s ubiquitous.
In China, you can go up to the counter, but you cannot place an order. Sometimes, you cannot even read a physical menu. Not even so much as a menu on the screen. You have to scan the QR code using the Panopticon app (also known as WeChat) and then get bombarded with advertisements. Like us and get a free drink! Click here for a random coupon! Join our WeChat group! No, no, no, no. Then click through their garbage UI to find the one thing you actually want. Make sure you don’t accidentally replace your order with one of their “recommendations” that pop up! Then, try to check out. Do you want to join our WeChat group for exclusive deals? Do you want to create an account? Dismiss, dismiss, dismiss.
Click here to pay. Only WeChat Pay is accepted. No cash, you backwards peon. Enter your mobile number here. Required to order. Ha ha, nice try, 123456789 is not your mobile number. No worries, we got it from WeChat. You’ll get 3 order confirmation texts and 2 advertisements a week for the next six months.
I’ve never seen a restaurant in the US or Europe that requires you to download an app to order. They bribe you with coupons and discounts to download the app, which is fair enough, I suppose, but you’re not obligated to. You can still walk up to the counter, tell your order to a human, and then pay with cash. No algorithm will ever know who you were or what you ordered.
What a fantastic article.
Epic charges less than 30%. I think it was 10-15%. That’s their whole selling point. And when I say it is their whole selling point, I do genuinely mean it, because the platform and software itself are pretty bad compared to Steam.
I think that is a different situation in your city. I don’t know which city it is, and I don’t claim to know much about how the Italian economy works, but housing prices seem similar to what I’ve got in my city (Portland, Oregon, USA), except that wages are drastically lower. So my guess is that it’s a problem with people being underpaid as Italy is a developed economy, similar to the US.
€24,000 a year would be about €12 an hour which is below minimum wage in my city. A minimum-wage worker would be paid about $34,000 annually, or €29,500. The mean hourly wage in my city works out to about $76,000 annually (€66,000). I prefer the median as a better estimate of what ordinary people make, but the census bureau only reports the mean as far as I could find.
To make my point clearer because you missed it: Councils should NOT be paying for these regardless of whether anything relating to corporate bailouts happens, because detached single-family houses are a poor use of resources and an inefficient and wasteful form of housing.
I don’t agree that the reason single-family detached homes with lawns are necessarily unaffordable primarily because of greed. That might be one factor, but I think the main factor as to why they’re unaffordable is simple geometry. Councils don’t want to pay for miles of roads, pipes, and electrical cables just to serve less than a hundred families, so these costs get imposed on the developers and homeowners. Some states, including mine, will require new single-family developments to have an HOA, which is responsible for paying for the upkeep of some of these resources. That directly results in higher assessments for ratepayers. Or, where the council absorbs the costs, they still get passed on to owners and renters through higher property taxes.
So while I’m sympathetic to your arguments, I feel that blaming only greed is a shallow understanding of why nobody can afford a house.
I think that the US as a country needs to abandon the idea that every family should have a detached house with four bedrooms, two cars, and a lush green front garden surrounded by a picket fence. It’s just not sustainable. That made sense in 1960, but the country’s population has doubled since then.
On the other hand, I would like to see it possible for every family to be able to at least afford a basic 2-bedroom condominium with all the amenities that modern life has to offer, including walkable spaces, accessible green areas, and reliable public transportation.
11,000 hours of minimum wage labour in my city would be $185,000. Maybe a bit too low to be entirely realistic, but $200,000 is probably within reach with a bit of elbow grease on the government side.
-1 / 0 can be defined to be a special new number, ⭐.
This system of numbers is actually mathematically consistent and has all the properties that a number system should have. But using simple algebra, you can prove that in this new number system, ⭐ = 0. And then you can also prove that all other numbers equal zero.
This number system is known as the zero ring, and it’s the ring where the only number is 0 and the following operations are defined:
All other symbols, including 1, 2, and ⭐, are just alternative labels for 0 in this number system. In other words, defining division by zero is essentially the equivalent of reality collapsing in mathematics.
So yes, you can validly define division by zero. You just get degenerate mathematics if you do. So be careful what you wish for.
I wrote this comment on a $150 phone which for all the purposes that I use it for, performs exactly as well as an $800 iPhone.
All the messages have been automated for over a decade.