1 Mooch?!

I bet he barely lasts a Welk!

For sure… the city/township/municipality responsible for repairs and upkeep should have clearly marked and coned off this route immediately.

Sure, Google should have updated the route and maybe deserves to pay a small fraction of the total payout depending on how egregious the warnings to them are and specific details of the case…

BUT, whatever entity is responsible for the bridge deserves to pay out most to all of the settlement because it should not have been possible to drive off of the bridge without plowing through a clear barrier.

They probably didn’t pay for the steering wheel monthly subscription.

DOZENS of thousands!

The big problem is AI will (eventually) “see” things as a human does so even in the case that these MIT researchers are able to insert nearly invisible artifacts that fool AI into thinking the edges are different than they actually are, a sufficiently large training set will allow the AI to see that the color borders are more important than artifact borders…

Which will allow AI to bypass this type of watermarking.

The only way this suit ends well for humanity is if at the end the judge has enough common sense to issue a multimillion dollar settlement back to the scientists named to absolutely chill this type of corporate behavior immediately.

It almost certainly won’t happen and we’re probably fucked… But hey, we can dream, right?!

We all want a nude Tayne.

I’m still waiting for my Equifax payout…

This is definitely interesting… However I would caveat this with the fact that in the past, Nature & Science have both previously published more than their fair share of studies that would later be retracted for lack of reproducibility.

Most of this is due to the fact that when you’re a publication on the bleeding edge and there’s a lot of mid-term name and career recognition that comes with being published there, there’s also a higher level of academic fraud that can happen to get there.

I would keep a cautious eye out for retractions as well as labs that attempt to reproduce results… I also want to dig deeper and see if the mouse studies done had replication attempts by different labs as well and I won’t have a ton of time to do that today, but regardless it’s certainly a potentially a large breakthrough in cognition if it holds up.

Oh my god, are you me?!?

Consumer Reports is also a great source for good info on product reliability.

If you’re making a large purchase like a car or if you have a handful of smaller purchases to make, a month or a year subscription is a drop in the bucket.

As of the last time I purchased a car, it seems to be the one holdout that realizes if you sell out to ads and corporate interests, you undermine your own reputation.

"Then you will see it is not the paperclip that bends…

It is only yourself."

For sure… Non-decentralized social media has value created by the immense number of connections and content created.

It also has the risk of abusing those connections and making the network less valuable by a centralized decision to clog it with paid content… Which alienates users and makes the experience less efficient.

Facebook did it, reddit is doing it, Twitter is trying to do it. The move is almost inevitable.

Decentralize it and it takes almost all potential greed out of the equation so the network stays most valuable to users.