Not at all. Pretending we’re so hyper focused on whether it’s AI that we’re mislabelling good writing as bad. And using abusive language. Marginally better than pretending everyone can’t read, I suppose.
Yeah, agree, ignoring would have been a much better response from my side, now in after-hand. I'm glad I said what I said though, although not sure where the "abusive" language comes from.
I appreciate the way this information is brought up and the points being made. I feel it brings a context to the Bills conversation that's hard to touch on. It makes it easier to understand on a social/technical level that's challenging. It's easy to shrug off "loosing privacy is bad, but bad guys are bad too" argument.
Yeah, the privacy aspect is definitely an important aspect of the conversation but I find it’s very easy to brush off.
I think explicitly pointing out the contradiction between the government saying that we need to boost our digital sovereignty while at the same time working to weaken the very foundation digital sovereignty is built in is an aspect we don’t really talk about and is much harder to just brush off under the guise of “we need to stop criminals”.
Pedantic comment: There is no such thing as an Apple iWatch; they finally did it right and named a product without `i` in front. Just Apple Watch. My guess is the level of detail the "signals" can be seen is what matters. Apple Watch is good for some things but its not constant its only checking in from time to time to get a reading. Purpose built device probably has higher details (faster polling or something) than a small thing on your wrist.
What if tickets where given with devices; the device would hold the hash value of the facial recognition and zero data would be stored outside of the device. have open 3rd party reviews of these processes and made public so we keep our world safe but without the bullshit excuse that "privacy has to be given up for security".
I believe you, It think I'm also the same; however for me at least, I feel like I can "think" of what something looks like. This is hard to explain since its very "personal" way its easier to say "i can see a square" nope I can't see anything but I can "think" of a square.
The whole imagine a ball in your mind. Now tell me what colour it is. No idea you tell me :D I can pretend and make up a color or go with what my gut tells me which is the most common color my brain was probably trained on.(red). but in reality I don't see any ball.
I'll 2nd this; Obsidian has a new core feature being beta tested called "base" it allows for filtering on properties and other attributes of notes into a table type view, allowing display and editing of those properties in the "base" view. This is a huge step forward for a lot of users wanting to make the jump off of Notion.
reply