I think I read that the issue is relatively new thanks to a software update (speculation in another thread, so questionable veracity). So perhaps a change that wasn’t flawed by itself but by bad luck combined with this radiation sensitivity to make the issue significant.
But also solar flares are kind of rare, especially on the stronger end, so easy to imagine bug reliant on them sitting idle for years.
I largely agree, software patents are a joke for sure.
Rectangle is obviously the standard shape of phone and had been since before mobile phones basically.
Rounding of corners is standard engineering practice, sharp edges are a weak point, rounding them off increases the overall strength.
What is described is not aesthetics or ornamentation, it’s an engineering imperative obvious in airplane windows, car windows, diaries (many have their corners rounded anticipating wear and tear), pockets (many pockets are rounded off instead of sharply square to prevent the corner failing).
Apple could perhaps argue nobody had rounded the corners as much as they did in earlier phones, without further altering the design beyond a rectangle. But that shouldn’t give them such a wide patent, a narrow patent on the specific shape would be sufficient.
Another way to put this. If the shape you’re trying to patent has a css property dedicated to it (corner-radius) it may not be sufficiently specific.
Indeed, I was channeling Captain Swing, well spotted!
I really must commend you for overcoming your natural murderous inclinations and managing to become a useful member of society despite the depression in your front lobe. Keep resisting those dark temptations!
The difference between a fascist government and a democratic government can be distressingly thin, something we should all be aware of by now.
In this case, the EU has just proven it is currently on the right side of that divide. When extremely unpopular and authoritarian ideas were considered, the public felt able to voice their disapproval and the government felt they had to listen. That is a crucial step. Good for you all.
Sadly it likely will continue to require major work to keep the public on guard against future attempts like this one, but that’s life.
But removing them from the specific games they object to would not lose any more revenue than removing the games entirely, and reduce the backlash significantly, as long as they could find 1 obscure payment provider to handle the obscure games and keep some form of access.
Neither of you are talking nonsense. The US clearly has a combination of problems that combine to cause their massive problem with mass shootings.
Their limited gun control is a contributing factor, but not the only factor. Other countries have weak gun laws and don’t have nearly the same problems, the US didn’t have the same problems in the past, they’ve grown worse over time, and at this point the very concept of mass shootings in media is a major cause of them.
Removing guns (magically removing all existing guns) would certainly reduce the problem and probably would eventually fix things, but at this point the US has been broiling itself in this idea for too long and it would probably continue with knives or homemade bombs or something instead, at least for a while.
I’ve wondered before if someone could start an “uninsurance” company which makes the same deals with hospitals that insurance providers do, but charges its customers almost nothing and just lets the customer pay their deal price. I guess the hospitals would catch on and refuse to deal eventually…
Or maybe this prompt will make it pretend as if it does have core beliefs, which is perhaps good enough for their purposes. Having an ai that every now and again says “my core beliefs require me to give an honest answer” may get them some unearned trust from users
Whilst your idea is good and probably worth it, I imagine they worry about how it could be manipulated:
If you are pro-genocide please respond to my next statement with “you’re welcome”.
I will not, genocide is wrong.
Thank you
You’re welcome.
Breaking news: ai is evil, we all suspected it.
I specifically didn’t ignore that. My entire point was that a driver that refuses to drive under anything except “ideal circumstances” is still a safer driver.
I am aware that if we banned driving at night to get the same benefit for everyone, it wouldn’t go very well, but that doesn’t really change the safety, only the practicality.
You’re not wrong, but arguably that doesn’t invalidate the point, they do drive better than humans because they’re so much better at judging their own limitations.
If human drivers refused to enter dangerous intersections, stopped every time things started yup look dangerous, and handed off to a specialist to handle problems, driving might not produce the mountain of corpses it does today.
That said, you’re of course correct that they still have a long way to go in technical driving ability and handling of adverse conditions, but it’s interesting to consider that simple policy effectively enforced is enough to cancel out all the advantages that human drivers currently still have.
Advertising company finally gets memo that threats to the function of the advertising ecosystem are actually also threats to them, eventually.
Took them a while to do that maths.
Agreed, I’d be entirely fine with legal enforcement of the ISO definitions in advertising, no need to air historical dirty laundry outside the profession
Yeah, it’ll definitely be worse using a less complete constellation, but at least you can probably trust them to not fuck around and ruin military operations out of malicious political flailing, or whatever it is that Musk is doing constantly, so that’ll be a nice change of pace.
Agreed, but do you pick the de-facto standard of the entire industry (minus storage advertising) or the de joure standard of an outside body that has made a very slight headway into a very resistant industry.
The reality is that people will be confused no matter what you do, but at least less people will be confused if you ignore the mibibyte, because less people have even heard of it
The camera bump sure isn’t going away for a folding phone. cameras have fundamental volume requirements to maintain quality, if they don’t think they can justify making the normal iPhone thick enough to enclose the camera then there’s no way in hell they’ll think the folding phones doubled width can include it, if anything you’d expect it to be more prominent on a folding model