Reddit has a warning for AI companies and other scrapers:
play by our rulespay us for the content our users generated or get blocked
Fixed.
Sludgehammer
0 Post – 167 Comments
Joined 1 years ago
"What if we ignored what made our platform successful and instead tried to force our product into a already crowded market?" Elon Musk, Tech genius
Blood letting can actually be healthy in many American males, since often they have a overabundance of iron. Thus we must conclude the Elon Musk Supergenious has used Grok AI to let the Cybertruck analyze their owners through the autodrive cameras and automatically bleed them if they have a overabundance of iron. Tesla continues to innovate and in fact probably saved this mans life!
Windows 10 is pretty crappy but tolerable, everything I've seen about 11 suggests it's a utter shit show.
I mean... I don't expect them to scrap GMail, but their reassurance means nothing. IIRC they said the same thing about Stadia.
Eh, at least this will reduce the amounts of PFAS being produced. I mean, teflon pans at least actually have a useful purpose, rather than things like PFAS coated burger wrappers.
I think he was trying to get out of Twitter and wanted to do a real life version of his Dogecoin pump and dumps. You know, talk a big game, hype up how the stock is gonna go to the moon after he brings his genius to bare on the company, then dump the stock and pull out of the deal. However, during the hype phase he managed to say some legally binding things and suddenly found himself forced to honor what he thought was going to be empty hype.
Article text :
By Liran Einav and Amy Finkelstein
Dr. Einav is a professor of economics at Stanford. Dr. Finkelstein is a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
There is no shortage of proposals for health insurance reform, and they all miss the point. They invariably focus on the nearly 30 million Americans who lack insurance at any given time. But the coverage for the many more Americans who are fortunate enough to have insurance is deeply flawed.
Health insurance is supposed to provide financial protection against the medical costs of poor health. Yet many insured people still face the risk of enormous medical bills for their “covered” care. A team of researchers estimated that as of mid-2020, collections agencies held $140 billion in unpaid medical bills, reflecting care delivered before the Covid-19 pandemic. To put that number in perspective, that’s more than the amount held by collection agencies for all other consumer debt from nonmedical sources combined. As economists who study health insurance, what we found really shocking was our calculation that three-fifths of that debt was incurred by households with health insurance.
What’s more, in any given month, about 11 percent of Americans younger than 65 are uninsured. But more than twice that number — one in four — will be uninsured for at least some time over a two-year period. Many more face the constant danger of losing their coverage. Perversely, health insurance — the very purpose of which is to provide a measure of stability in an uncertain world — is itself highly uncertain. And while the Affordable Care Act substantially reduced the share of Americans who are uninsured at a given time, we found that it did little to reduce the risk of insurance loss among the currently insured.
It’s tempting to think that incremental reforms could address these problems. For example, extend coverage to those who lack formal insurance. Make sure all insurance plans meet some minimum standards. Change the laws so that people don’t face the risk of losing their health insurance coverage when they get sick, when they get well (yes, that can happen) or when they change jobs, give birth or move.
But those incremental reforms won’t work. Over a half-century of such well-intentioned, piecemeal policies has made clear that continuing this approach represents the triumph of hope over experience, to borrow a description of second marriages commonly attributed to Oscar Wilde.
The risk of losing coverage is an inevitable consequence of a lack of universal coverage. Whenever there are varied pathways to eligibility, there will be many people who fail to find their path.
About six in 10 uninsured Americans are eligible for free or heavily discounted insurance coverage. Yet they remain uninsured. Lack of information about which of the array of programs they are eligible for, along with the difficulties of applying and demonstrating eligibility, mean that the coverage programs are destined to deliver less than they could.
The only solution is universal coverage that is automatic, free and basic.
Automatic because when we require people to sign up, not all of them do. The experience with the health insurance mandate under the Affordable Care Act makes that clear.
Coverage needs to be free at the point of care — no co-pays or deductibles — because leaving patients on the hook for large medical costs is contrary to the purpose of insurance. A natural rejoinder is to go for small co-pays — a $5 co-pay for prescription drugs or $20 for a doctor visit — so that patients make more judicious choices about when to see a health care professional. Economists have preached the virtues of this approach for generations.
But it turns out there’s an important practical wrinkle with asking patients to pay even a very small amount for some of their universally covered care: There will always be people who can’t manage even modest co-pays. Britain, for example, introduced co-pays for prescription drugs but then also created programs to cover those co-pays for most patients — the elderly, young, students, veterans and those who are pregnant, low-income or suffering from certain diseases. All told, about 90 percent of prescriptions are exempted from the co-pays and dispensed free. The net result has been to add hassles for patients and administrative costs for the government, with little impact on the patients’ share of total health care costs or total national health care spending.
Finally, coverage must be basic because we are bound by the social contract to provide essential medical care, not a high-end experience. Those who can afford and want to can purchase supplemental coverage in a well-functioning market.
Here, an analogy to airline travel may be useful. The main function of an airplane is to move its passengers from point A to point B. Almost everyone would prefer more legroom, unlimited checked bags, free food and high-speed internet. Those who have the money and want to do so can upgrade to business class. But if our social contract were to make sure everyone could fly from A to B, a budget airline would suffice. Anyone who’s traveled on one of the low-cost airlines that have transformed airline markets in Europe knows it is not a wonderful experience. But they do get you to your destination.
Keeping universal coverage basic will keep the cost to the taxpayer down as well. It’s true that as a share of its economy, the United States spends about twice as much on health care as other high-income countries. But in most other wealthy countries, this care is primarily financed by taxes, whereas only about half of U.S. health care spending is financed by taxes. For those of you following the math, half of twice as much is … well, the same amount of taxpayer-financed spending on health care as a share of the economy. In other words, U.S. taxes are already paying for the cost of universal basic coverage. Americans are just not getting it. They could be.
We arrived at this proposal by using the approach that comes naturally to us from our economics training. We first defined the objective, namely the problem we are trying but failing to solve with our current U.S. health policy. Then we considered how best to achieve that goal.
Nonetheless, once we did this, we were struck — and humbled — to realize that at a high level, the key elements of our proposal are ones that every high-income country (and all but a few Canadian provinces) has embraced: guaranteed basic coverage and the option for people to purchase upgrades.
The lack of universal U.S. health insurance may be exceptional. The fix, it turns out, is not.
I really hate the term "simp" but it really fits here. Having legions of people pledging scraps of cash to literally the wealthiest personon Earth is just so... pathetic.
I'd really love it if they did like some countries and added the sales tax(es) to the sticker price in stores too
I don't think it's even about that, they're angry because the want to be angry. The why doesn't matter, if the current right wing outrage du-jour had been... I dunno, left handed people rather than trans people, you'd see all the same people working themselves into a screaming tantrum if a game or movie had a left handed person in it.
I can't quite see it, but I'm really guessing there's some sort of money laundering angle here.
So are ostriches and their meat looks like this (image stolen from American Ostrich Farms)
with more than 100,000 followers on X who liked her increasingly worrying messages.
It's all happening on X!
That ad is one of the dumbest attempts at damage control I think I've ever seen.
He spends more time on a soap box ranting about COVID-19 and masks then actually addressing what he's actually in hot water about. It's literally just "The student violated dress code standards and I'm totally not a racist, BUT LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THE TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT MAKING WEAR MASKS OVER THE COVID HOAX!!!!!!!!"
Tesla should seek to oust Elon from the company.
They can't. The only thing propping up the ludicrous stock price is the myth of "Elon Musk, Super genius" and the legions of Musk fanboys. If they kick Musk out they lose both and the stock will tank. So they've got to keep him in place, even as he runs the company into the ground.
No no, It just means the market is shifting, people are now un-interested in streaming. It has utterly nothing to do with Twitch being run into the ground by the out of touch decrees of management.
Anyway, more firings for the workers and fluffier golden parachutes for company nobility.
I mean, he'll probably be okay. Deep sea submersible technology is pretty nailed down at this point.
What happened with the Titan is the Ocean Gate guy thought he was smarter than everyone else and could make a deep sea submersible with non-standard components (carbon fiber that had passed it's expiration date, off-the-shelf electronics, oh and a window not rated for the depths it was going). And to be fair the out of the 15 attempted dives down to the Titanic only one of them catastrophically failed. A 6.6% failure rate isn't too bad... for some applications.
Also if you're quick, before NYTimes pops up it's "subscribe" window, you can hit Ctrl-A and Ctrl-C to copy all the text from the article... which is how I got the text from my previous post.
God I hate those. Paper tea bags you can toss into the fireplace or in the compost depending on the time of year, but those plastic ones you can't do anything but chuck them into the trash.
You know, that's honestly one of the better photos of Trump I've seen. He looks angry and... conniving I guess, rather than his normal "pompous blob of butterscotch pudding" look.
or is this even worse than current tesla quality?
I think it's this one.
"Country threatens to kill civilians unless terrorists do as they say" Yeah, I'd say that's not gonna work, but the whole point of this ultimatum is to justify the slaughter of Palestinians.
In the long run it'll probably work out for Hamas too. Watching friends and family get murdered will probably radicalize a lot of folks and drive up recruitment.
At least at one major auto maker, environmental and serious health concerns are outweighing its aesthetic appeal.
Suuurree they are. Hasn't chromium getting more expensive over the past couple years? I'm guessing this sudden concern about the environment and the health of the workers will save them quite a bit of money in the long term.
Still, credit where credit is due, at least this cost cutting measure that actually has positive benefits for once.
It's like watching a child who stubbornly refuses to learn that touching a glowing stove coil is bad.
So let's see here, Trump is 77 years old, but will be 78 at the time of election. Let's just add eight years and we get 86... yep he's angling for president for life.
This headline is much funnier when your skimming headlines and misread it as "Google ordered to pay $339M for stealing the very idea of Christmas"
Eh, I'm gonna disagree. There were plenty of YA novels at about that time that were popular enough to get movies, were liked by girls and were written by women. The Hunger games, Divergent, heck even Harry Potter caught hardly any flak (well with the exception being when J.K. Rowling decided to take a hard right down Terf street).
IMO the reason why Twilight and Stephenie get so much hate is A) Stephenie isn't a very good writer, and B) the central theme of the books is how important it is to have a boyfriend/be horny for a guy who wants to kill and eat you. This the bedrock of the Twilight hate, it's a bland book with a bland plot which was only successful because tapped into a vein of teenage horny. Like... imagine if the central theme of Harry Potter was how attractive Harry found Voldemort and how much he wanted to bang him and teenagers were going wild for how romantic and inspiring their relationship was. I have a feeling this alternate version of Harry Potter would catch a lot more hate too.
That's... computer generated. BeamNG maybe?
Move fast and break people.
I can't remember where I read it but someone said "LLM's provide three types of answer: so vague as to be useless, directly plagiarized from a source and reworded, or flat out wrong but confidently stated as the truth." I'm probably butchering the quote, but that was the gist of it.
“For us as humans to think that we can make a product better than God can is interesting.”
And yet I bet this doorknob still eats bread, a product much better than the raw grain God provided us.
It was a crypto exchange, I don't think there is a "legit way" to run one of those.
Considering what we've decided to call AI can't actually make decisions, that's a no-brainer.
What do you want to bet this is just going to end up being another way for them to mass demonetize videos?
I love how fixated Mush is on Media Matters when it's 99% certain that it's due to him validating a "Hitler did nothing wrong" post. In his own little bubble it's gotta be someone else's fault.
Hey, if a woman won't put in the effort to grow extra limbs I'm just not interested.
It's so nice to see a developer doing this rather then going the "Here's a updated version of the game! Also we're removing access the originals so it's the only version available now." route.