How is IAs approach much different to that of a regular library?
True, they were digitising physical books and lending copies. But this is not much different from how a regular library works (assuming controlled digital lending, yeah I heard aboud Covid period 😕).
I’m not an expert on American law (know nothing about it), but reading the articles and comments I thing there’s an argument to be made for IA functioning as a library.
The economic system is broken. It incentivises infinite growth in a finite environment. That’s just not sustainable and will backfire in one way or another.
What we need as a civilization is a shift in economic values that would push for a more sustainable model. That shift can be seen, but, in my (expert /s) opinion, it’s too little and too late to completely avoid a disaster.
Maybe Go, haven’t messed with it at all and it looks interesting enough to try. Other than that I could do C#, since that’s where I have most experience. Maybe node.js if I would want to suffer a bit.
He also said there’s no war just a special military operation, but here we are.
Which part is gullible?
That current Russian regime won’t stop? It’s not like it would be a first time for them to invade another country.
Or did you mean NATO involvement? Who knows… I’d like to believe that they would involve, but I’m not guaranteed.
WW3, eventually. The regime won’t stop. The ambition is there to rebuild the USSR. That would mean starting a conflict with NATO and, if I’m lucky, NATO will actually involve.
It’s cool and all, but this feels more like a toy than a tool. I can make dead simple web site in minutes with current stack. Nothing, but plain static pages.
Heck, if I looked for it, I bet I could set up markdown to HTML converter as this is already a widely used functionality throughout the web.
2 monitors plus laptop. One is mainly used for IDE and git, other one for anything else that’s relevant: browser, Jira, notes, second editor to reference stuff. Laptop screen is to the side and mainly used for chats.
Wouldn’t mind a third big screen, often notes, DB, RDC or brower have to be juggled around.
Monitors – hell yes! RGB – can’t stand it. My keyborad has a plain white backlight and that’s it. It’s purely functional.
So there is a thing I kind of pirate, but not entirely – e-books.
But thing is, our public library page has e-books and some of them are available to be read online. Now I cannot officially download them, however opening a network tab on browser console shows me a request to download the whole .epub file. So what I do is copy that request as curl and just download it via terminal.
Is it piracy, probably, is this resource publicly available for me to read, definetly yes.
Other than that I don’t really pirate much else.
I’ve been using Kobo Libra 2 for more than a year now. It’s good for me as I mostly read books. It’s black and white and has adjustable (intensity and temperature) backlight. One thing I’d recomend – get a case as well. The screen is rather soft and scraches easily.
Other than that I can’t recomend much else since I haven’t had anything else. It’ll depend very much on your use case: do you need a collored screen, what do you intend to read, comics, PDFs, regular books.
Reading regular books screen size does not matter as much as for PDFs and comics. And for comics colored screen might be a better choise.
My general recomendation: an adjustable backlight is a must, both intensity and temperature, deside on a size and color requirements and start looking for something in your price range. Kobo and Onyx were the brands I looked at first, but there are others.
I’m pretty much the same. Although my e-reader supports generic epub files, so I go to whichever book shop site and look for ebooks.
When I bought my e-reader, I specifically looked for one that wouldn’t lock me into their ecosystem too much.
uBlock usually blocks those cookie pop-us for me, didn’t really noticed them.
They can prohibit whatever they want, but how enforceable is it? Does Nvidia intend to play whack a mole by checking for translation layers?
Slap Google SSO on that and you’re good. Honestly that’s worse than regular registration.
If I die today, as in stop existing completely, I wouldn’t have any questions. When I die I will no longer be, there will be no conscience, no memories, nothing. That is the death I desire.
If I exist after death, even for a moment, that means death is not the end. Who am asking questions? Why can I ask one last question? How can I get one question / request fulfilled this one last time? I can’t really separate these things that easily.
Let’s not involve physics terminology into a philosophical discussion. It confuses more than clarifies. Especially (with my limited understanding) when the claims might not be correct at all.
I would expect multiple observers to have the same result no matter the distance between them. Such setup entangles the observers and the collapse has one real outcome.
I would not dare to go deeper into the subject as this is the extent of my knowledge. To be convinced otherwise I should see a credible proof, experimental or theoretical.
So even if you have friends and loved ones on the other side in your relative paradise, from an ‘identity’ perspective they won’t be exactly the same as the ones on this side.
We might be arguing different things then. A relative paradise for me involves my loved ones. If they would not be there as they are now in my life, then it’s no paradise. But that would contradict our initial condition of ideal afterlife.
This seems to be an inherent issue with this condition. It’s rather easy to construct contradictions in this framework. Moreover, as a moral framework it’s way too complicated for no aparent reason at all. Accepting unconditional relative afterlife idea either nulifies any moral argument at one point or another or requires to arbitrary ignore and contradict certain aspects of it.
If I get to pick and choose things I accept in a theory, then it’s a bad theory.
Because (a) most people don’t actually want to do that, and (b) there’s social consequences for eating babies in this world.
My point exactly. However, what I was ilustrating is how easy it is to devolve into this kind of reasoning. What moral foundation is there to back up the descision? Most people don’t want to? That’s not a reason, that’s an observation. Whatever morals I construct on a social basis become irrelevant. That’s why religions have gods and sins.
We are going into a what if terirory here and I don’t think there is any good argument to be had there.
So I’m gonna end on this:
A copy is not an original. I am me, nothing more nothing less. There is no consent I can give prior to my existence. Going further into the analogy is pointless, life is not a surgery.
But no belief system I’m aware of that has endorsed a similar model has also endorsed an omnipotent creator,
Umm, Christianity? Just to name at least one major religion.
I misread that so ignore it.
During my time in a call center people would often call for invoices or messages they received. Most of my work there was reading the thing together with them. Nothing more was necessary, I just read alound their itemized invoice that they had received and it would solve their problem.
Click through pop-ups are even worse in this regard. I myself usually just automatically click No before I understand what just happened.