This. If it has the same index of refraction as the screen, it may fill in the damage and make it invisible. It might help to know if the screen is acrylic or glass to choose the right one. The poster has nothing to lose, sounds like.
Yes Solid is another idea that's clearly the right thing, especially now. It might mlnit be easy to convince everyone they need it though, and the economics will be uphill given the trillions in entrenched, incumbent opposition.
Yes registering fake views is fraud against ad networks. Ad networks love it though because they need those fake clicks to defraud advertisers in turn.
Paying to have ads viewed by bots is just paying to have electricity and compute resources burned for no reason. Eventually the wrong person will find out about this and I think that's why Google's been acting like there's no tomorrow.
I doubt it's true though. Everyone has something they can track besides total ad views. A reddit bot had no reason to click ads and do things on the destination website. It's there to make posts.
Suburban homeowners can use electric blowers. They're good enough now and not silent but way quieter and non-emitting. If you get the mower and trimmer and chainsaw, etc in the same system, they all share batteries. It's SO NICE not having to repair, refuel, tune, and tolerate small engines.
These tools probably aren't ready for professional landscapers yet but they're almost there.
There's experimental/nightly support for things like: `push_within_capacity()` which is a more manual way (user-space code would have to handle the return code and then increase the capacity manually if required) of trying to handle that situation.
Vec::push_within_capacity is a nice API to confront the reality of running out of memory. "Clever" ideas that don't actually work are obviously ineffective once we see this API. We need to do something with this T, we can't just say "Somebody else should ensure I have room to store it" because it's too late now. Here's your T back, there was no more space.
As a customer or a vendor, being able to see any company's health like this must be wonderful if you're evaluating whether you want to enter a relationship with them. More of the world should do this.
To be frank, in using it for well over a decade I think something broke only once or twice. It's pretty stable and they give plenty of deprecation warnings.
That's all fine but Microsoft is also screenshotting everything, uploading it, then selling you services, pushing ads, mining and training on your data and who knows what else. So you pay both ways.
This statement is wild hyperbole and doesn’t represent the privacy landscape of a default Windows 11 install. Even Windows Recall, an optional opt-in beta product only available on specific hardware, very clearly and specifically in its legally binding privacy policy says that data never leaves your device and is never sent to Microsoft.
Windows is paid for by OEMs. It doesn’t cost much (and it’s free for some classes of devices) but Microsoft still gets paid for it.
Don’t forget they also get paid for a lot of Windows-adjacent services. 365 subscriptions, Bing users clicking on ads, and the whole business ecosystem of Azure, Entra ID, Microsoft Exchange/Outlook 365, etc.
And the air quality around these plants is poor, leading to health problems for the neighbors.
This short term, destructive, thinking should be criminalized.
I think it's time to discuss changing the incentives around ai deployment, specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai. Musk himself raised the idea.
> specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai
Without agreeing or disagreeing with this idea, I’m left wondering how you’d write such a law.
If company A fires Bob and says “Bob’s job is now done with AI”, that’s a clear case.
What if Bob was on a team of 8 and they just go without backfilling Bob? Maybe AI was the cause; maybe it was the better coffee they got for the office; maybe the workload just shrank a bit; maybe they’re worried about the economic outlook for next year…
Or company A fires Bob and his whole team and outsources to company B. Maybe company B is more efficient at that business process. Maybe they were more efficient before using AI. Maybe they don’t even use AI at all. Maybe they were more efficient before AI but are even more efficient now. In which cases were “jobs replaced by AI”?
Maybe I start a company C and do that business process with 4 people and AI that would take other companies 8-25 people. A brand new company D starts and uses my company C instead of hiring a team to do it or contracting with company B. Were any “human jobs replaced by AI”? Whose job(s)?
> specifically paying into a ubi fund whenever human jobs are replaced by ai.
Then existing firms will just go bankrupt, and new firms which never had human employees will use AI, and you’ll have the same job losses but no direct replacement and no payment into the UBI fund. Instead, just tax capital gains and retained corporate profits more than currently (taxing the former the same as normal income, with provision for both advance recognition and deferment of windfalls so that irregular capital income doesn't get unfairly taxed compared to recurring income), and fund UBI with a share of that is initially basically the difference between status quo taxes and the new rates. That realigns the incentives, such that an increased share of the economy being capture by capital (a natural consequence of goods and services being produced in a more capital intensive, less labor intensive way) drives more money into the UBI fund, without needing a specific job-level replacement count to drive the funding.
It can't be "criminalized" if govt and justice system is effectively actively bribed by the AI cartel because AI-related GDP "growth" is only veneer hiding the economical fuckups of the government
In the case of Grok's turbines, no emissions controls means sick people. Plus all the CO2 pushing climate collapse faster which hurts every coming generation.
Gas plants are not bad… but imagine 400 MW of gas plants in a concentrated area. You’ll always have NOx and SOx by products whenever you’re burning gas.
Gas is certainly less of a problem than coal, but they still produce plenty of bad stuff: nitrogen oxides and bad VOCs like formaldehyde that are well studied to increase risk of asthma and some types of cancer. I certainly wouldn’t want to live close to one.
reply