They made a Jungle Cruise movie?

So that’s quarterly savings of around $400,000 for Dell and $600,000 for HP, if they disabled it for all of their devices, which they’re not. So maybe saving $1 million per year at Dell and maybe $2 million at HP.

Here’s the Google blog post announcing it: https://blog.google/products/android/quick-share-airdrop/

Anyone know what the embargo that wound up lasting 3 months was about? I’m assuming a security vulnerability that is now fixed?

I’m sure there are many jobs AI is not capable of doing but some CEOs probably do a bad enough job that an AI chat bot could probably do better.

I know we like to dump on CEOs all the time but a good CEO does not seem like one that could be replaced by AI, certainly not by what is currently being hyped. There are just a lot of highly visible companies with CEOs who aren’t actually very good. I suspect the dysfunction of publicly traded companies and the goals of Wall Street investors (or other nations’ equivalents) frequently not aligning with a good long-term health of a company has a strong influence on this.

And of course these guys will be happy to have AI replace them; they’ve already made boatloads of money and think they’ll be able to keep that going even if they lose their job.

[email protected]

That slogan in the preview image (“AI Girls Never say no”) is creepy enough on its own, but even more when users are having it imitate real people

I’m only just now realizing that’s a label and not a Priority Mail envelope

What Slappy is this?

This is who I think of as Slappy:

I don’t work there and I also say it will be a huge mess

I can’t remember if it’s announced or rumored, but I think there’s an entry-level MacBook coming with an A17?

Yes, those were features in the most recent release, although I can’t find the announcement post offhand.

Oracle being the first casualty of the AI bubble could hardly happen to a “nicer” company

https://archive.ph/WClqv

The one area I would sorta disagree is on updates, although only inasmuch as they’re needed for security fixes on things connected to the internet. But if it’s not connected? No, no updates needed unless I encounter a bug or they add a new feature I really want.

I remember it looking better than this screenshot shows

To tag along with this, I remember this becoming an issue 10 or 15 years ago and a lot of the big lyrics websites were forced to reach licensing agreements with the songwriting groups like ASCAP and BMI (they collect and distribute royalties on behalf of the writers). I think a couple sites tried going to court to claim fair use but lost pretty quickly. That’s pretty established law going back to the earliest days of music publishing. Just because they were publishing online instead of printing up songbooks doesn’t mean the laws change.

The article on The Verge has a quote from someone at Valve saying they expect that will be among the first ones the community creates for it.

As much work as the Verge article says they put into cooling, I’m not too worried about heat issues

Marrow was interested in “how public institutions decide what’s worth showing, and what happens when something outside that system appears within it”.

He said using artificial intelligence to create it was “part of the natural evolution of artistic tools”, adding he sketched the image before he used AI.

“AI is here to stay, to gatekeep its capability would be against the beliefs I hold dear about art,” he said.

[…]

The artist, who said similar stunts he had carried out at Bristol Museum and Tate Modern were not “approved, sanctioned, or acknowledged”, denied it was vandalism.

“The work isn’t about disruption. It’s about participation without permission,” he said.

“I’m not asking permission, but I’m not causing harm either.”

It’s like the same “logic” AI companies use when they take copyrighted content without permission: claim you’re not causing harm so you don’t need permission. They don’t see the harm, so from their perspective it’s fine, even if the creator doesn’t want them taking their work.

Railing at the institution as being gatekeepers might reveal the flaw in their logic. People or institutions are entitled to decide what belongs in their collection and what does not. Random outsiders are not entitled to be a part of that collection. They can be invited in if the curators are interested in their work, but the curators are generally not required to add them just because they’ve made something. The artist can create their own collection and invite others to be a part of it, but they’re not entitled to be in anyone’s collection. They also can’t just go and take something from someone else’s collection without permission, and even taking a photo of someone else’s work and placing it in their collection would at the very least be bad form. The other artist is just as entitled to decide where they do or don’t want their work displayed.

With encryption and encryption backdoors I often use the illustration that I put a lock on the door of my house, not because I have something to hide, but because I have things valuable to me that I want to protect. Just because I have nothing to hide, it doesn’t mean I give the police a key to my house or let them add their own lock to my door. I wouldn’t want to come home one day and discover a random policeman had let himself in and was making copies of all my documents and photos just to make sure I wasn’t doing something bad. I’d be even more upset if I came home and discovered a policeman from another country had let himself in because he’d gotten a copy of the same key, or a thief was doing the same because he’d gotten a copy of the key.

Building off that illustration, I might have a collection of art in my house. This guy is not entitled to come into my house and look at my art, nor is he entitled to come into my house and put a picture on an empty space on my wall just because he thinks it should be there. Railing against gatekeepers keeping his slop out to me seems as ridiculous as him being mad that I won’t open my door and let him put a picture on my wall. He might not be damaging my walls, but just forcing his way in against my wishes is something I would view as harmful.