21·
9 months agoPaywalled.
Cosmic Cleric
All posts/comments by me are licensed by CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, unless otherwise noted.
- 0 Posts
- 38 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
Cake day: June 15th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
18·9 months agoAmongst other things, yes.
Activision User Research Union-CWA is the first group of video game user researchers to form a union
So what exactly about their users do they research?
Man, this current age of AI really sucks.
From the article …
GNOME sysadmin Bart Piotrowski shared on Mastodon that only about 3.2 percent of requests (2,690 out of 84,056) passed their challenge system, suggesting the vast majority of traffic was automated.
I notice you asked for an explanation and then only sort-of read the first sentence.
No, I read the whole thing, fully. I just disagreed with your analogy, thought it was a bad one, too verbose and obfuscating of the subject being talked about. Also it didn’t cover someone searching your belongings with/without your permission, the subject being talked about. Law officials have more legal leeway to detain you than they do to search your belongings without your permission, so your analogy doesn’t work (especially when you throw in beatings into it).
Also, didn’t think your last paragraph was legally accurate, but didn’t want to bother arguing the point, since ‘amendment > law > policy/rule’ is a well-known given. I’m aware of the difference. When I asked my original question, it was to confirm if the border enforcement people were actually honoring the 4th amendment, or not, whatever their thought processes were.
I did appreciate you taking the time to reply (and civilly at that) though, thank you. P.S. I hope the tone of my reply wasn’t too harsh, it wasn’t meant to be rude, just straightforward.
Consent in a situation like this is difficult to establish, to the point of it being pointless.
Hard disagree.
Did they ask him if they could search and he said yes, or no? Or did they just take his device away from him and did a search without his permission?
Consenting to a search, or have one mandated by a judge’s order, is one of the fundamental pillars of citizen rights and laws in this country.
Was it a legal or illegal search? That’s not a pointless question to ask.
Great to hear! Way overdue. That industry really needs some of those protections.
From the article …
The launch will be formally announced at the 2025 Game Developer Conference in San Francisco, Calif., the world’s largest industry event for video game professionals, where workers will be joined by other CWA members to launch this powerful new organization.
It’s “voluntary” in the sense that either you allow it or you don’t get into the country.
Was that explicitly said to him? Did they tell him that if he refused the inspection that he would be denied entry?
BTW, what you described is a mandatory inspection.
immigration officers at an airport searched his phone
There’s no mention in the article if this search was voluntary, or not.
Edit: For the downvoters, please point out where I was wrong; I’d honestly really like to know if it was voluntary or not.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its children.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its land.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its minerals.
Ukraine is supposed to give up control of its power plants.
Is Ukraine a nation, or not?
From United States Copyright Office …
Based on an analysis of copyright law and policy, informed by the many thoughtful comments in response to our NOI, the Office makes the following conclusions and recommendations:
• Questions of copyrightability and AI can be resolved pursuant to existing law, without the need for legislative change.
• The use of AI tools to assist rather than stand in for human creativity does not affect the availability of copyright protection for the output.
• Copyright protects the original expression in a work created by a human author, even if the work also includes AI-generated material.
• Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material, or material where there is insufficient human control over the expressive elements.
• Whether human contributions to AI-generated outputs are sufficient to constitute authorship must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
• Based on the functioning of current generally available technology, prompts do not alone provide sufficient control.
• Human authors are entitled to copyright in their works of authorship that are perceptible in AI-generated outputs, as well as the creative selection, coordination, or arrangement of material in the outputs, or creative modifications of the outputs.
• The case has not been made for additional copyright or sui generis protection for AI- generated content.
The Office will continue to monitor technological and legal developments to determine whether any of these conclusions should be revisited. It will also provide ongoing assistance to the public, including through additional registration guidance and an update to the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices.
Per CNN (per US Agency for Global Media), number of regular listeners, in millions, of VoA…
- Indonesia 64.8
- Nigeria 37.4
- Mexico 37.1
- India 29.1
- Iran 12.2
- Peru 11.9
- Russia 10.1
- Ukraine 9.8
- Iraq 9.3
- Egypt 9.0
From the article…
Other AI tools are really good at filling in the blanks in images, too, but Gemini Flash is particularly good at it
Other AI models can do this too, but you have to be a bit smarter about how you ask about it. As Verge highlights, Anthropic’s latest Claude model, and OpenAI’s GPT 4o will refuse to alter watermarked images. We can confirm that when you add copyright-protected images to Microsoft Office applications, its Copilot and Design tools will refuse to modify them directly.
Point being FM coverage is almost universal in any area where there’s a significant number of people, not just lone homesteaders, uncontacted tribes, suchlike. Yes there may be people there that could be reached but the total number is small and if they want any news, they’re getting them from the town over once a month.
[Citation required]
There’s no need for us to keep arguing this point, I totally agree that the coverage of listeners of shortwave radio today is a lot less than what it was in the past, but my point is that it’s a lot more still than you’re imagining.
The point is rather if you’re operating an FM transmitter, you not only have the money for a satellite dish
Talking about people who listen, receive, not transmit, and who do not have ready funds available.
Also, FM reception distances is much shorter than shortwave, something you didn’t mention.
but let’s face it the amount of people that you can only reach via short wave is dwindling, they mostly switched to satellite. They rather feed into the local FM broadcast network, and of course you can stream over the internet.
You would actually be surprised how many poor regions in Central and South America as well as in Africa and Central Asia actually rely on shortwave still.
A lot of it is Christian and right-wing broadcasts, but still, it’s used more than you would think. Not everyone can afford expensive satellite rigs to receive.
RT
?
From the article …
… and …