lucaspfeifer

4 mesi fadiscuss

It is scary but also exciting. As long as there are humans making informed decisions, there will be demand for quality sources of information. But to keep up with AI, content sites will need to raise their standards. Less intrusive ads, less superficial stuff, more in-depth articles with complex yet easily navigable structure, with layers of citations, diagrams, data, and impeccable accuracy. News articles with the technical depth of today's dissertations.

lucaspfeifer

anno scorsodiscuss

Great, now can you make an AI-powered type checker? I wish to expel those pesky types, which too often seem to exist only to clutter my otherwise pristine code. :)

lucaspfeifer

2 anni fadiscuss

Yes, the distinction between theory and hypothesis can be important, but a distinction should also be made between popular science and rigorous peer-reviewed literature. Popular science is meant to be easy for the general reader to understand. Often that means using simpler words, as long as they are still accurate in a general way.

In this case, I believe theory is an acceptable word to use. The MW dictionary, for the definition of 'theory', says

2a. "a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action"

3a. "a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation"

Seems to me that the usage in the article fits either of these definitions well enough.

lucaspfeifer

2 anni fadiscuss

Here's a little more of that chapter:

For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am about to deliver you into the hands of those you hate, to those you turned away from in disgust. 29 They will deal with you in hatred and take away everything you have worked for. They will leave you stark naked, and the shame of your prostitution will be exposed. Your lewdness and promiscuity 30 have brought this on you, because you lusted after the nations and defiled yourself with their idols. 31 You have gone the way of your sister; so I will put her cup into your hand.

Ezekiel 23: 28-31 (NIV)

lucaspfeifer

2 anni fadiscuss

Seems like the key issue here is this: what is the purpose of conducting the authentication? In the case of personal accounts, it's for the benefit of the individual. They get their own account to safely store personal data. Here, the individual management of biometric authentication devices, as you described, is a great thing. A passkey can be generated without exposing biometric data. The individual has the responsibility and incentive to keep their devices secure.

But the above article is an example of the opposite case, where the authentication is for public security. In this situation, the individual cannot be entrusted with their own auth, so if each person were to use their own device, it would need to be quite tamper-proof. Seems far simpler at this point to do face / fingerprint auth, where the security guard ensures that no one is wearing a mask or fake finger. Yes, there is the concern that the bio-data could be stolen / misused, and for that reason I think that bio-auth for public safety should be limited to a single standard type (e.g. face), with the others being reserved only for private auth. That way, a compromise can be reached between public safety and individual privacy.

lucaspfeifer

2 anni fadiscuss

What do you find 'loaded' about the phrase 'mixed society'? It is more descriptive than the meaningless phrase in the original headline: "How Does Paris Stay Paris?".

lucaspfeifer

3 anni fadiscuss

Universities, especially the more prestigious ones, have been trending towards aggressively simplistic labeling of complex social issues. While their stated goal is to protect minorities, the oversimplification increases polarization and division. These doctrines in fact harm the minorities that they were intended to help, by forcing people to choose a side. Plus, they focus too much on the negatives, when we need more positive, meaningful, constructive discourse.

comments