It’s the same builders that build the cheap homes
What cheap homes? No one is building those these days, other than maybe Habitat for Humanity and companies making mobile/prefab homes.
It’s the same builders that build the cheap homes
What cheap homes? No one is building those these days, other than maybe Habitat for Humanity and companies making mobile/prefab homes.
But that is just it. When a commercial enterprise is literally saving copyrighted content and car reproduce it on demand, copyright holders have every right to object. Either use public domain materials and/or license copyrighted materials, or don’t try to make money off AI.
I didn’t say that at all. I was responding to OP claiming they don’t memorize content at all.
Not many. And generally not book passages or whole NY Post articles. That’s the point. OP claims it tosses the original, but it doesn’t.
This process is akin to how humans learn by reading widely and absorbing styles and techniques, rather than memorizing and reproducing exact passages. The AI discards the original text, keeping only abstract representations in “vector space”.
Citation needed. I’m pretty sure LLMs have exactly reproduced copyrighted passages. And considering it can created detailed summaries of copyrighted texts, it obviously has to save more than “abstract representations.”
I don’t know that he has refused, but he definitely allowed Russia to play him like a fiddle in having him publish the DNC hack (and let’s not forget, it was a hack, not a leak) while holding on to RNC hacked data.
I have questions on if Trump wins in 2016 without Assange, and that’s enough to make me hate him.
You can still find a few Rax in the southern part of Ohio
Which, as the article states, they are starting to end that practice.
“Modest?” $14 a month? $5 would be modest. I literally pay less for whole as streaming services.
If you don’t like the UN, Israel, then perhaps they should also repeal Resolution 181 (II).
I hate southerners and am from a proud Union state. What the hell are you talking about?
We called it senioritis. That sudden change of excitement to dread as seniors realize they are going to be separated from the peer group they’re mostly been with for years at their local school and now have to go out and make something of themselves on a new, unfamiliar environment.
I have read it, and find it bullshit. Libertarians always manage to decide to “strategically” vote for the Republican that promises authoritarianism but also promises low taxes. Again, it’s not about what Libertarians say they support, it’s who they actually support.
Paying lip service is meaningless. I look at who self-professed libertarians actually vote for. That is the basis of my statement.
If that’s the goal, fine. But we know the real reason is profit. If people are getting less, they should pay less.
You want to maximize liberty, but have a funny way of showing it. Libertarians vote for the most authoritarian they can, as long as they will cut taxes. Even if that means banning abortion, keeping marijuana prohibition, forcing religion on children in schools, supporting civil forfeiture, preventing people from choosing sustainable energy, and so much more.
As has famously been said, taxes are the price we pay for civilized society. The non-aggression principle I believe is absolute bullshit. Libertarian would happily screw over anyone, claiming they are simply exercising their personal liberty. They couldn’t care any less about the well being of anyone else but themselves. Absolute barbarians if you ask me. Personally, I’m happy to get good services for my taxes, and not see my money go to a greedy asshole CEO. Sure, politicians are also greedy assholes, but at least the people can vote them out.
It would cost less because a single entity, costing much less overhead. Also, a single entity would have far more buying power. Almost every doctor would have to accept them, eliminating out-of-network costs. And we wouldn’t have hundreds of overpaid executives that pat themselves on the back with multimillion dollar bonuses for denying sick people coverage. And we can see it in action. Most industrialized countries already have some form of universal healthcare, and they all cost less per capita. People that actually have universal healthcare generally love it. And don’t talk to me about waiting lists. I’ve been on plenty of waiting lists right here, and lots of people can’t even get on them because they can’t afford the care they need.
Competition simply does not work in the healthcare market. When people are sick, they are limited typically to one option. And it has inelastic demand, so changing prices don’t change demand, and thus hospitals and doctors can charge whatever. The system, built on the economic principles libertarians espouse, is god-awful.
Libertarians only care about 2 things: lowest taxes possible and legal weed, and they would gladly sacrifice the latter in favor of the former. Anything else is nothing more than lip service.
Universal healthcare means taxes, and that is the one thing Libertarians hate above all. Never mind that it would be cheaper than private insurance. They relish in the fact they can skip buying insurance, and if they get hurt, ERs are required to treat them anyway.
so we can move beyond it.
This does not even move the needle in accomplishing that in any way. It is divisive BS.
Who says I can only be angry at one group? I am angry with the men in that group, but also the people that would place me in that group merely because I also possess a penis.
Depends on location, but I don’t think I’m too bad.