If you put someone on a wall hook, would they then have been hung? Likewise if I suspend my painting with a noose, has the painting been hanged?
If you put someone on a wall hook, would they then have been hung? Likewise if I suspend my painting with a noose, has the painting been hanged?
I fucking love beans
Thanks for bringing up a point to continue the conversation, unfortunate you’re getting downvoted with only sarcastic disagreement to go on. I disagree, but only on a point of nuance – ideally that financial incentive improves the quality of mod offerings, and in some cases it does (I’ll take your word on Assetto Corsa mods). But I’d say it’s still a net-negative on the whole because then the financial incentive becomes the goal, not a quality mod. It also gives the parent company control over visibility, so they’ll promote the mods that get them the biggest cut, which inevitably will be the shiniest ones and not necessarily the ones that actually improve the game, then passionate creators get disheartened and leave.
All conjecture – I’m not super active in any modding scene, my only experience is hitting the 256 mod limit in Skyrim a long time ago.
Considering freezer storage tessellation as a deciding factor in your storage container shapes feels like putting theory way ahead of practice. But I still want them.
What would be extremely rock and roll-- punk rock, even – is donating all of the proceeds from that show to pro-union efforts.
#DonateItDave, or something
I’m here to support.
Count #1: Guilty
Count #2: Guilty
Count #3: Guilty
Count #4: Guilty
Count #5: Guilty
Count #6: Guilty
Count #7: Guilty
Count #8: Guilty
Count #9: Guilty
Count #10: Guilty
Count #11: Guilty
Count #12: Guilty
Count #13: Guilty
Count #14: Guilty
Count #15: Guilty
Count #16: Guilty
Count #17: Guilty
Count #18: Guilty
Count #19: Guilty
Count #20: Guilty
Count #21: Guilty
Count #22: Guilty
Count #23: Guilty
Count #24: Guilty
Count #25: Guilty
Count #26: Guilty
Count #27: Guilty
Count #28: Guilty
Count #29: Guilty
Count #30: Guilty
Count #31: Guilty
Count #32: Guilty
Count #33: Guilty
Count #34: Guilty
I dug in (thanks for linking sources) and there are some promising details. The ~80% figure for the US is from a 2011 report (even though the citation states 2014…), so it’s very old. In 2019, the US began an initiative to increase awareness of this issue and address it, see the progress here (pdf link).
Not trying to counter the narrative, but at least we’re talking about it on the federal level, so maybe that can provide some optimism to people.
The mishandling is indeed what I’m concerned about most. I now understand far better where you’re coming from, sincere thanks for taking the time to explain. Cheers
Thanks for the response! It sounds like you had access to a higher quality system than the worst, to be sure. Based on your comments I feel that you’re projecting the confidence in that system onto the broader topic of facial recognition in general; you’re looking at a good example and people here are (perhaps cynically) pointing at the worst ones. Can you offer any perspective from your career experience that might bridge the gap? Why shouldn’t we treat all facial recognition implementations as unacceptable if only the best – and presumably most expensive – ones are?
A rhetorical question aside from that: is determining one’s identity an application where anything below the unachievable success rate of 100% is acceptable?
Can you please start linking studies? I think that might actually turn the conversation in your favor. I found a NIST study (pdf link), on page 32, in the discussion portion of 4.2 “False match rates under demographic pairing”:
The results above show that false match rates for imposter pairings in likely real-world scenarios are much higher than those from measured when imposters are paired with zero-effort.
This seems to say that the false match rate gets higher and higher as the subjects are more demographically similar; the highest error rate on the heat map below that is roughly 0.02.
Something else no one here has talked about yet – no one is actively trying to get identified as someone else by facial recognition algorithms yet. This study was done on public mugshots, so no effort to fool the algorithm, and the error rates between similar demographics is atrocious.
And my opinion: Entities using facial recognition are going to choose the lowest bidder for their system unless there’s a higher security need than, say, a grocery store. So, we have to look at the weakest performing algorithms.
Yeah I got the impression it was a recoverable condition after a search found a bunch of guides for “unbricking” (Android phones). Semantics are the true enemy it seems
So then it didn’t run after the car wash – unless we’re ignoring the mandatory steps needed to get it working again, the headline is pretty accurate. Or are you considering “bricked” a permanent condition?
That’s so cute, I can’t. Thanks for paying your taxes on time.
Crypto did unfortunate things to the space.
Wow do you even respect your dog?
That’s the intended effect – a condescending dismissal of being condescendingly dismissed. Not much you can say to a clear sign of disengagement.
It’s a freeing feeling when you decide to put money into what you want instead of what has the biggest ROI.
Thanks! I hadn’t gotten around to finding a GW replacement yet, super happy this came up!
I hear you, and those things seem nice at a glance, but I don’t agree with your sense of guarantee. We’re seeing an upending of things that “usually” happen, or that “definitely can” happen, especially with “self-managed” entities such as the SCOTUS. Have you seen judges actually get held accountable recently, even locally?
Dems have to be in on it, that’s the only thing that makes sense. It isn’t Dem vs. Rep, it’s rich vs. poor :(