You’ve got sensors for acidity and alkalinity, but water is almost never truly neutral, so for sure you can taste that. You can also taste/smell a bunch of other stuff in water, like salt, other minerals, or chemicals like chlorine.

Humans will anthropomorphize damn near anything. We’ll say shit like “hydrogen atoms want to be with oxygen so bad they get super excited and move around a lot when they get to bond”. I don’t think characterizing the language output of an LLM using terms that describe how people speak is a bad thing.

“Hallucination” on the other hand is not even close to describing the “incorrect” bullshit that comes out of LLMs as opposed to the “correct” bullshit. The source of using “hallucination” to describe the output of deep neural networks kind of started with these early image generators. Everything it output was a hallucination, but eventually these networks got so believable that sometimes they could output realistic, and even sometimes factually accurate, content. So the people who wanted these neural nets to be AI would start to only call the bad and unbelievable and false outputs as hallucinations. It’s not just anthropomorphizing it, but implying that it actually does something like thinking and has a state of mind.

.gs is not one of the currently listed domains. Are you sure that’s a real one?

Put them on ice to slow/sleep them, then slice through the center on the head with a sharp knife.

If it’s their favorite genre surely there are other hits besides this decade old rage bait.

The watchabilty thing actually makes stuff nearly unwatchable for me because I like to, you know, pay attention to the movie I am watching. They have to make the characters so one note and cliche so that half-brains can pick up what’s happening in the film. They beat you over the head with everything but don’t bother closing up plot holes because they think you weren’t paying enough attention to see them.

This one is getting closer to reading like a joke.

Maybe it’s how my brain works, but I’d have way more research to do about a pre-built than building myself one. I’d be worried about warranty and customer service, the build quality, are they using low quality components, and wondering where they are cutting corners.

The Linux distro analogy is a good one though. That’s probably one of the reasons why I still haven’t dipped my toes into Linux is that there’s not an obvious way to go, and everything I read about it assumes this baseline of understanding that I sometimes have and sometimes don’t.

Compatibility is not a real issue imo if you use the tools available to plan the build, such as pcpartpicker. There’s only a couple compatibility things and they aren’t too complicated. After you pick a CPU and GPU, it’s pretty simple to get compatible MB and RAM, big enough power supply, and an SSD. There doesn’t need to be anything more to it.

I don’t really consider building a pc to be a hobby. It’s really nowhere near as much work as people who haven’t done it think, and it really isn’t something you keep doing after it’s done. There’s not maintenance or things to play with all the time, at least no more than with a pre-built.

Maybe a downside is that tech support is up to you, or you have to pay for it. But you’ll be able to go to a local spot of your choosing and will probably still spend less than you would on a pre-built.

Doesn’t need to be. Pick a budget and your priorities, then bang together a shopping list on pcpartpicker. There’s plenty of easy guides and which processor is best for each budget range. Yeah if you’re trying to min/max it can take some time, but I just get the cheapest of every component (except SSD) and it’s been great.

I’m sorry this shit post did not meet your expectations. Please rate this shit post as follows:

1. VERY SHIT
2. SOMEWHAT SHIT
3. BARELY SHIT
4. QUALITY

Not the worst use for it I’ve seen. I’d rather see this than another screen shot of a tweet.

The law has no way to go after parents, unless there’s already some law on the books that does so and the penalties defined in this one somehow apply to that.

The penalties defined in this law are for OS providers not having a way to set age data within an account on a device or for not sending the age signal when requested and for developers ignoring the age signal or not requesting it.

It’s better but the only place the word verification, or anything like it, actually appears in the text is in the title and in the introduction. It doesn’t have any verification in it, just passing whatever you tell your device to other systems it interacts with.

I wish the politicians were honest about what it does. Accepting this makes it seem like we’re ok with verification because that’s what’s in the title, but it’s possible to be both supportive of requiring some type of standard parental control system and be against any sort of age verification.

Think about how much it must take for parents to set up age controls on every single individual app and service their kids use. Having the ability to set up an account for your child on their phone or laptop and know that appropriate controls for that age range will be automatically applied will make it so many more parents will do so than they do now.

This is a good thing because we don’t want what they’ve got in the UK, which is requiring this patchwork of age verification from websites and apps to avoid liability. We want it to be the responsibility of parents, so that we as adults can once again browse freely and no longer be asked to input our birthday to “verify” we are old enough to see a list of beers the local brewery has on tap.

Ok I see you just want to be mad.

Read the bill. It’s not the horror show you are imagining.

Google could do it right now if they wanted to. It’s not against the law to require your customers to provide PII to use services. It just opens them to bad press, liability for mishandling the data, and potentially liability for knowing a user is a minor and showing them mature content anyway.

Have you read the law? I have and I disagree.

It’s actually an incredibly privacy conscious method of doing what it is trying to do, which is to allow parents to set up a child’s account with their age information on a device and have that age bracket information passed to websites and applications. That way, it makes it harder for a child to bypass age-restrictions, but without requiring dangerous age verification methods such as ID or face scans.

It doesn’t require any PII to be sent to any servers and in fact requires that no identity information is sent except age bracket data.

Please update your title to remove the misinformation about the bill, specifically calling it “OS-level ID verification” is not even close. It’s not got anything to do with personally identifying information or any actual verification of age information.

It’s actually an incredibly privacy conscious method of doing what it is trying to do, which is to allow parents to set up a child’s account with their age information on a device and have that age bracket information passed to websites and applications. That way, it makes it harder for a child to bypass age-restrictions, but without requiring dangerous age verification methods such as ID or face scans.

I think I follow. Top is how I have it set up now, bottom would be how I could do moca?

There’s a utility box on an exterior wall labeled “Television”, which also has a bush planted in front of it. I don’t think I can put my router here… :(