I suppose it stands to reason: LLMs were trained on human writing, and overuse certain tropes and patterns because those patterns are commonly represented in human writing. But many people aren't particularly adept writers, and they're going to turn to AI to either do their writing or inform how they write. The trope ends up reinforcing itself as people just start to think that AI output is just what normal writing looks like.
Embarassed to say I didn't realize that Tracy had a new gig over at Autopian. Really pleased this article made it here because now I can see what he's been up to! This is a great place to start.
I think Oblivion's reception was mostly in relation to how people felt about Morrowind. Oblivion simplified a lot of what Morrowind did, which drew some ire. Atmospherically, though, people weren't happy that they moved from Morrowind's much more unique fantasy setting, full of massive fungi and swamp-striding bugs and weird demigods, and moved to a much more generic looking medieval countryside. That said, I also appreciate the game's reassessment, because I think some of the factions quest lines are among the best in the series.
Generally speaking, encyclopedias are tertiary sources, so that makes sense (though the line between secondary and tertiary sources is sometimes blurry)... but as you say, there are plenty of topics (a niche programming language under active development primarily by one guy is a good example) where the topic might be notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article but not widely discussed enough to have a good source other than the primary developer. I understand that "well the guy who made it said it" sounds like an obvious argument, but I also understand that Wikipedia is trying to maintain their role as an encyclopedia first and foremost. I'm not sure what the optimal path is.
An NFT is superfluous here. If you buy a digital copy, and someone gives you DRM-free files that you can copy and run anywhere you'd like, you have about as much ownership as you can get over a digital good. In this case, an NFT would just serve as an entry in a crypto ledger that you bought the game... which is an alternative to running a digital storefront and tying game purchases to an account, but it doesn't really change the fact that you can only redownload something for so long as it is hosted at the place where you bought it.
I don't buy every game on a physical disc—I don't see the point for live service games, for example—but I do have a fairly large collection of physical PS5 games because I like that assurance that I can continue to play that game forever. I guess what we see here is that after 2028 I have no reason to own a PlayStation ever again.
They can buy a USB Fido token. I've had this argument with employers in the past; some states have laws that require the employer compensate employees for requiring the use of their personal mobile device, even for something as simple as MFA. There's no such thing as a free lunch: if you want to require an employee do something, you must be willing to pay for that capability. Ethically, I think all employers should be held to this standard. Legally, anyone who employs people in California, Montana, and I think Massachusetts must be aware of that standard.
I agree. I'm sure someone will try to split hairs and say that "well, buying a license is buying something, just maybe not the thing you wanted," to which I say, it should be disclosed up front. Simple as.
The legal reality is that you probably purchased a license, tied to your PlayStation account, and revocable at any time for any reason. You don't buy a movie, you buy access to watch it as many times as you want during the period in which it is licensed to you. This is, of course, bullshit; this doesn't or can't apply to a physical DVD, or even a DRM free digital copy, so it is a measurable step backwards for consumers.
The surveillance is not about protecting you or your property; I'd argue it never has been. It's about protecting those in power and entrenching the power they wield.
I'm sorry, but this is nonsense. The Rivian R1T starts at $80k for the dual motor trim and the quad starts at $116k, before options. This is so far outside of the average car that I am comfortable considering it high-end luxury. A Ferrari is unattainable luxury. A custom-built coach should come with an invitation to the guillotine. I forget sometimes that this forum is full of wealthy individuals who insist that they are still just common folk.
Brand damage and lost of trust from customers are consequences of security breaches. I'm not saying don't have a CRM, but I am saying don't complain when the customer data in your CRM leaks and customers complain. LastPass has had several such breaches over the years, and I think people are right to say that the company has a reputation of poor security hygiene.
By all means, have a CRM. But consider that it probably doesn't need to be as broadly accessible as you think it does, and consider that the people with access to it probably need to be held to a higher standard.
> I think a lot of people use products like LastPass because it makes storing passwords easier. Works on mobile, computer, tablet. Pretty good experience tbh.
Yeah but wanting a product like LastPass doesn't require that you use LastPass. There are many good alternatives.
You wouldn't cross-shop a Rivian and a Slate. The Rivian is a high-end luxury vehicle with a laundry list of features, including things like self-driving. The Slate is literally the opposite: it has a laundry list of things it doesn't have and, indeed, its lack of features is part of the sales pitch.
Ok, but riding an ebike on the interstate is already illegal. If the problem you're trying to solve is kids taking ebikes onto the interstate, then you don't need any new laws
"Wary," not "weary." I try to suppress my pedantic urges online, but wary is a great word and it gets misused a lot! I hope the feedback is helpful and not annoying.