Just this guy, you know?
What?
Compiling quality datasets is enormously challenging and labour intensive. OpenAI absolutely knows the provenance of the data they train on as it’s part of their secret sauce. And there’s no damn way their CTO won’t have a broad strokes understanding of the origins of those datasets.
They could just as easily close ranks with support for Bibi galvanizing over perceived foreign influence in their politics. Nationalism is a powerful narcotic and the US making that move could just pump it into their veins.
Random turbulence that maims the flight crew just wouldn’t be practical as a “thing that just happens” on regular longhaul flights.
I never said it happens often but it absolutely does happen. Here was a particularly spectacular example that happened to folks a few years back on their way to Australia (and note, if you want more examples, the article lists a couple of other past incidents that also resulted in crew and passenger injuries):
https://apnews.com/article/49db2788d04d4e11bcbb1a63dbae4199
Passengers on a flight from Canada to Australia said they had no warning about turbulence that suddenly slammed people into the ceiling of the plane and injured more than three dozen — a phenomenon that experts say can be nearly impossible for pilots to see coming.
One passenger on that flight noted:
“The plane just dropped,” passenger Stephanie Beam said. “When we hit turbulence, I woke up and looked over to make sure my kids were buckled. The next thing I knew there’s just literally bodies on the ceiling of the plane.”
So again, I cannot emphasize this enough: wear your damn seatbelts, people.
Fair enough. Notably, that quote isn’t in the Reuters article, which is what I was commenting on.
No arguments about the need for an investigation, particularly if that quote from the pilot is genuine.
All that says is they’re investigating.
At this time, unless something new comes to light, there’s little reason to believe it’s anything but an unusual episode of turbulence.
Edit: and according to a different article, there is at least one passenger who claims the pilot said their controls “blanked out” which would qualify as “something new”.
deleted by creator
Headline is clickbaitey, the fact it’s a Boeing is irrelevant. This can just happen.
I was on a flight to Colorado from Canada, flying over the Rockies, and we hit a mild patch of turbulence that, without warning, suddenly turned into a quick, long drop that threw folks who weren’t belted in out of their seats and sent drinks flying.
The lesson is simple: wear your damn seatbelt and avoid walking around the cabin unnecessarily.
Sure, in the same way that some people only watch movies once, or read books once.
Speaking for myself, I’ve found only a small handful of games are worth my replay time, and most of them are Mass Effect…
Yes! God this show is underrated. They got bit by the “oh look it’s another Mad Men” stamp in season 1, but then the show pivots in season 2/3 and becomes something unique and special. And then I spent season 4 with a tissue box nearby. One of my favourite shows of all time.
Better Call Saul is also spectacular. In fact, I might go so far as to claim it’s better than BB…
If somebody wanted to draw animated kiddie porn they could still do that. How far would you go until you ban crayons
It’s genuinely impressive how completely you missed my point.
How about another analogy: US federal law allows people to own individual firearms, but not grenades.
But they’re both things that kill people, right? Why would they be treated differently?
Hint: it’s about scale.
The same is true of pipe bombs. But anyone can make a pipe bomb. Genie is out of the bottle, right? So why are there laws regulating manufacture and ownership of them? Hmm…
And how many times have you made this comment, only to have it pointed out that there is a big fucking difference between a human manually creating fake images via Photoshop at human speed using human skills, versus automating the process so it can be done en masse at the push of a button?
Because that’s a really big fucking difference.
Think: musket versus gatling gun. Yeah, they both shoot bullets, but that’s about where the similarity ends.
Is the genie out of the bottle at this point? Probably.
But to claim this doesn’t represent a massive shift because Photoshop? Sorry but that’s at best naive, and it’s starting to get exhausting seeing this “argument” trotted out repeatedly by AI apologists.
Then don’t call it that?
If the bar is “never made a mistake or published a questionable article in the entire history of the institution”, then there’s no such thing as a “newspaper of record” and I’m fine with that. Frankly, I never liked that idea as no one, no institution, no media outlet, no person, is totally free from bias, and no one should treat any one paper as universally authoritative.
But claiming the NYT is “unreliable” now, today, based on the actions of people who, if not dead are almost certainly retired today, is ridiculous.
deleted by creator
Also let’s just appreciate that the two examples cited by the poster are 1) a recent story that may genuinely be problematic (though I think it’s naive to believe either the Israelis or Hamas haven’t engaged in sexual violence given its prevalence in warzones), and 2) reporting on a manufactured war that’s now nearly 30 years old.
It’s absurd to think you can hold the current NYT to account for actions done so long ago that many of their current journalists wouldn’t have been borne yet.
That’s not to say the NYT doesn’t have it’s problems. It is absolutely a both-sidesism establishment paper. But if you’re gonna criticize it, at least do so with modern examples.
I ignored it because it’s irrelevant.
You ignored the context and circumstances because they’re irrelevant?
Your answer to every comment has consistently been (paraphrasing): “trust the cops, they know what they’re doing”, irrespective of any surrounding facts that might suggest otherwise, or any past history that would suggest that law enforcement doesn’t deserve that level of blind trust.
Given that, there’s little point in further discussion.
deleted by creator
Sure, maybe if they drew their weapons immediately, before his act. That’d make sense. They wouldn’t know what he was gonna do.
The trouble is, based on the reporting we have, they drew their guns after he lit himself on fire, not before:
as soon as he was engulfed in flames they started yelling at him to get down on the ground. They even drew their guns on the burning man before someone pushed them to get fire extinguishers to extinguish the fire.
I’m thinking by the time the guy was engulfed in flames he was a little too preoccupied to do much else.
Can you imagine facing a living bonfire, and your first thought is “I should draw my gun and tell them to get down on the ground”? There’s genuinely no excuse for that level of inhumanity.
There are more beginners then there are experts, so in the absence of research a beginner UI is a safer bet.
If you’re in the business of creating high quality UX, and you’re building a UI without even the most basic research–understanding your target user–you’ve already failed.
And yes, if you definite “beginner” to be someone with expert training and experience, then yes an expert UI would be better for that “beginner”. What a strange way to define “beginner” though.
If I’m building a product that’s targeting software developers, a “beginner” has a very different definition than if I’m targeting grade school children, and the UX considerations will be vastly different.
This is, like, first principles of product development stuff, here.
My Momentum 4s have 60 hours of battery life…