Its observed gravitational effects is evidence. Otherwise nobody would have given it a name.
GigglyBobble
It's about generators which certainly should not be trained with such material.
People don't think about that. You have to register somewhere in order to use your $12.99 cam, install some app and are good to go.
How would a someone not interested in tech know that the footage data is stored on some online server and you are at the mercy of their itsec.
And now Bob next door pushes his shit first and you have an extra hour fixing conflicts.
Designing the model to prevent it from generating illegal content
Yeah, good luck designing that.
Linux if you’re prepared to support it entirely yourself
What does this even mean? The most work caused in administering my company's IT comes from destructive patches from Microsoft. Just like a month ago they released a security patch that caused the domain controller to not reboot which is pretty much the worst thing you can run into aside outright malicious actors (not sure Microsoft doesn't count as one). So I had to "support" users by rolling back untested shit until a hotfix was released.
My private setup runs exclusively on Linux. Patches also sometimes cause trouble but it's just as infrequent and less destructive if it happens.
It's really not that different from an admin point of view but it's not Linux' business model to snoop on or extort you or to force proprietary hardware on you because sEcUrItY.
Well, obviously. It's just a protocol. Why wouldn't they be able to make it cross-platform if they wanted to?
That study says nothing about maintenance but is about repair cost after accidents. Those are 1/3 higher for EV because also small damages to batteries can increase risk of fire and batteries are also more readily exchanged due to lack of experience of the shops.
Everyone is talking about breaks while the study doesn't say anything about that.
fair pay for fair work
Sure but what's fair? As you described, the work did change considerably. Translating from scratch is much more work and also much harder than fixing a mostly ok output. It would not be fair to pay both jobs the same amount since the latter can be done by people with less expertise/education.
Eventually, AI output won't need any human editing at all. What then? Resisting change driven by technology is understandable from the individual perspective but it has always been doomed to fail. You know that "computer" used to be a job title?
Isn't blind partisanship the American way nowadays?
A great example how helpful hatred is then.
Nobody "automatically assumes" anything. Dark matter is the best candidate of possible explanations because it explains observation and still fits the standard model. Even if they find the necessary particles eventually, nobody would call it certain though. Certainty is a unicorn.