You might already know if you’re into clipping coupons, but a lot of manufacturers have a buy # get 1 free per 12 month deal. Taking advantage of that is often cheaper than buying whatever’s on sale for a particular month, not that you were doing that, just making a comparison.
Edit for clarity: I was referring to pet food. Just realized I didn’t mention that.
I mean, it’s sad that they were more concerned about a lawsuit than the health of the people involved, but that’s just showing that this sort of thing is effective. The exec wanted the request approved so that this very thing didn’t happen, but it was apparently too late. The whole thing is very sad but I’m glad that’s the position the execs had over “lol, no”. The exec wanted it approved so it seems like the request was denied by someone lower down and by the time the exec was informed there was nothing to be done
“Despite the fact some people might call it controversial, this is what Val wanted,” Voorhees told Variety.
We’ll obviously never know for certain whether Kilmer himself would have approved of this project. His daughter Mercedes Kilmer said she supported the film, and noted that her father was “a deeply spiritual man” who resonated with a “story of discovery and enlightenment.”
So there is no evidence that this is what he would have wanted, and Voorhees just said that? When I read that first bit I thought maybe he’d given his blessing before his death, but apparently not. I obviously don’t know what he would have wanted, and I hope his family is correct, but even if he authorized it, I think it’s gross. I don’t like actors for their faces, I like what they bring to the role and AI at least currently does not have the ability to bring anything.
Both mineral and chemical sunscreen produced them, but mineral produced far more. The difference is that titanium dioxide [TiO2] and zinc oxide [ZnO] are found in mineral sunscreen.
People abroad say the US is very litigious. Some of that is probably related lax consumer protection and the poor social safety net, but it’s nice to see that perception proven incorrect in this case. I wonder if he legitimately believed the hype about suing people in the US or if he would have done this anywhere else.
I’m not trying to make a case that Israel is somehow the good guy or anything, just that my statement is not related to the fact it’s a Jewish state. Israel is an apartheid state committing genocide. I was just making clear have no issue with Jewish people in general. Lots of Zionists on Lemmy so I was making that clear before it got derailed by bad faith actors. I am not following the Epstein thing that closely because it disgusts me to the point it makes me physically ill, so I can’t chime in about it at all other than to say it’s disgusting beyond reason.
Shapiro backs Israel and Tucker doesn’t. Trump is heavily aligned with Israel to the point that the war with Iran is basically because of them. I think Shapiro is safe so long as Israel sees him as useful.
Not that it should need to be said, but I’m not supporting an antisemitic conspiracy about a new world order or anything. It’s just that Trump and his people are dumb and easy to manipulate and several countries, including Israel, are taking advantage of that. That’s just normal country geopoliticing, not related to any religion or ethnicity.
I absolutely can’t stand it, but realistically it’s often just the appearance of “lower taxes”. I know people who DONT PAY TAXES who want lower taxes. They are stupid and I want to scream. It doesn’t matter how many articles or studies or videos you show them, they just associate republicans with lower taxes and that’s what they want. They don’t particularly care about human rights, or outcomes for citizens, just the idea of lower taxes. Capitalism has made class solidarity so hard. These people have no idea who really has aligned interests and are in a constant bubble of misinformation that they refuse to do even the slightest thing to escape from. You can spoon feed them facts and they will spit them out. It’s like trying to feed a baby, but at least one day the baby may grow up and be able to feed itself. These people are incurious rubes who are ruining the world and are often not the ones suffering most from their decisions, though to be clear, they’re often not benefiting either. Also a bunch of Christian nationalists, and fascists, and run of the mill racist, sexist reactionaries.
Literally allows up to 10% to be AI generated. Charging a fee for commercial use, but I can’t see what that fee is. Feels like a psyop.
Wow. What a terrible idea. There was a woman who was sent to jail in a different state for several months and lost her house, car, and dog because AI misidentified her and cops didn’t give a fuck. Cops should need a warrant for facial recognition at the very least, if it’s allowed at all. Can’t wait for “give me a smile” to be codified into law.
Considering there was a film festival just recently making the argument that the art isn’t political, it’s nice to see his statement.
Thank you for the information! Based solely on my friend group, Marty supreme never even existed and sinners and Frankenstein were the best movies all year, so I wasn’t surprised about the results.
That’s the opposite of what the OP is saying. The meme version of the story is what misleadingly implied the AI cured someone’s dog. I’m glad you have a better understanding of what might have happened, but it seems like the meme version would have been likely to mislead people into trusting AI for medical advice, at least for their pets. AI is not responsible or capable enough to provide medical advice, certainly not for a population that cannot realistically advocate for itself.
I never watch or follow these, but I wonder if Timothees time spent campaigning ended up causing the film to be snubbed in every category. I haven’t seen any competing movie except Frankenstein, but all I heard about the awards in the run up is that everyone is mad at Chalamet.
While I understand and appreciate the sentiment, I actually think it’s important for a variety of reasons, the main ones being:
Although I don’t care in the general sense, I do think it often decreases their ability to be good politicians.
What a completely accurate description. The nuance of the issues being subtle yet catastrophic is always the part that I find the funniest, because how are they so incapable of seeing how that might be a universal issue? Thank you for the chuckle.
Ridiculous that Grammarly even attempted to do this. The article was good, but at the end, though they hedged, they fell into the same trap everyone seems to. AI is not better at coding than it is at writing and their tinkering with this does not suggest that. Grammarly had a bad product, but realistically, there was likely just no effort put into this aspect of the software. Maybe I’m way off base, and I don’t support AI either way, but I just think it was a poor way to end the article. Programmers think it’s good for art, artists think it’s good for programming, it’s almost like it’s easier to see flaws in a field you’re familiar with.
If you sandbox anything it’ll be safer than otherwise. Not really sure what you’re suggesting. I would still want the code reviewed regardless of the safety measures in place.
I wrote a program that basically auto organizes my files for me. Even if an AI was sandboxed and only had access to the relevant files and had no delete privileges, I would still want the code reviewed. Otherwise it could move a file into a nonsensical location and I would have to go through all possible folders to find it. Someone would have to make the interfaces/gateways and also review the code. There’s no way to know how it’s working, so there’s no way to know IF it’s working, until the code is reviewed. Regardless of how detailed you prompt, AI will generate something that possibly (currently very likely) needs to be adjusted. I’m not going to take an AIs raw output and run it assuming the AI did it properly, regardless of the safety measures.
While I personally don’t like AI, I do think it is changing things. I don’t think it’s ever safe to run code without oversight from an actual programmer, but AI will likely affect the number of programmers being hired in a non negligible way.
Not sure how I didn’t hear of this already. Apparently it’s not necessarily a breathalyzer, but the proposals include a camera facing the driver to monitor them and passive monitoring of the air in the car.
I don’t drunk drive and barely even drink, but that’s horrifying. I can’t believe this went under the radar for me.
More garbage that is going to break and cost thousands of dollars to fix in addition to all the violations of privacy. Cars are already advertising to people. Can you imagine if they put a camera inside the vehicle? Why not invest in public transit? That’s a great way to decrease impaired drivers of all stripes as well as help people in general. All this does is funnel more money into auto makers. I am so upset that this is the first I’m hearing of it.