deliriousdreams

Yeah. I think it might have been France that required kids to put their phones in faraday bags and leave them in a designated place (lockers or cubbies). But this article in particular didn’t specify how the ban was being applied. I am curious.

I’m surprised people think it will improve engagement or even kids paying attention to the lessons. Because as much as I understand that cell phones are absolutely a distraction in class to the point where I can understand banning them, kids who don’t want to pay attention and don’t have cell phones will find other ways to get distracted. The cell phone is just the newest medium.

If what some of these studies are saying is correct, not being allowed to have a cell phone is just as distracting if not more so.

Were you banned from bringing them to school or banned from using them in class? My school didn’t care so long as your gaming system or CD player etc was in your backpack or locker. They just didn’t want you using it in class or while transiting the hallways. When we eventually did get cell phones (mostly the Nokia bricks), a lot of us had them in school. But they were not an accepted thing to use or have cause disruptions or distractions.

So I wonder a lot about what we recall vs what actually was normal back then.

People have tracked this. They have literally made whole tracking websites just for this. This is a verifiable thing. This isn’t just someone making this up based on anecdotal evidence. There are websites dedicated to this.

https://www.cheapshark.com/

https://gg.deals/news/bundles/

https://isthereanydeal.com/

The article is alleging. We don’t yet have proof of the veracity of the documentation that has been collected. When the trial finishes and the court has determined whether or not those documents and other information gathered during the course of the case have been proven to be true, then and only then do we have something that says that Valve actually did this.

I don’t trust WB and I don’t trust Ubisoft. I’m not sure I trust Valve either but I can say that my distrust for them isn’t as extreme as my distrust for the other two companies.

If Valve did this, throw the book at them. But at the same time, I want to see difinitve proof.

I don’t think that’s what people are arguing.

If I manufacture your product from a product version prototype you provided me and give you unlimited access to that product to use outside my manufacturing plant and store front, then say, you can have and sell all this free product I manufactured for you, but you have to price it the same in my store as you do where you sell it elsewhere, that’s makes sense.

What doesn’t make sense and what isn’t right, is if they say "you can’t price your product that someone else is manufacturing for you at a price lower than the one your price my manufactured product of yours at.

But people keep thinking that those two groups are saying the same thing, that Valve should be allowed to do it regardless of who manufactured what when that’s not what they are saying.

If Valve is doing this, they obvious should have the book thrown at them. But we haven’t seen evidence of that that isn’t tantamount to hearsay. So we are doing what you should do when you hear something and can’t determine the veracity of what is being said. You wait for proof and don’t make up your mind based on rumors.

It would be a good idea if the entirety of the current industry for it wasn’t built entirely on smoke and mirrors type promises.

The general idea (so far as I can parse) is that if these companies are expecting a government bailout when it all goes south, then the tax payers who would be bailing them out should get paid back. But in practice, what will happen is we’ll be saddled with the debt and these companies will weasel out of it.

The fact is I don’t want to own a stake in any of these companies. I would rather they make it illegal for these companies to ask for a bailout from the government and close loopholes they will use to file for bankruptcy.

If they’re going to fail the government should buy their assets (data centers, infrastructure, etc) if the people agree that’s okay. Instead of what will likely happen (the companies left standing when it all goes under will buy up all the assets dirt cheap).

Almost every single police shooting of a person still in their vehicle is a “PR nightmare”. If that’s all it took to stop this from happening it wouldn’t have happened again after the first time.

Would you want to be the person trying to get into the seat only to stop the vehicle and then get arrested by the cops for fleeing? That sounds like a recipe for getting shot in the US.

With a wheel a shifter, and pedals, you can put the vehicle in neutral and push it out of the road if it dies or something. It doesn’t make sense to get rid of them.

Username checks out.

Approximately 1/3 of Americans own guns.

7% seems low just because so far as I can tell it’s 7% of adults in American not 7% of those who own guns.

I haven’t ever fantasized about shooting someone. Throttling them to death? Yeah. Dropping a piano on someone? Certainly. Shooting them? No. For one thing I don’t want to clean up a shooting. But for another at the point where you’re wanting to kill someone or maim them a gun is just impersonal and hands off. I’m not a murderer. I would absolutely have to be pushed to that point.

But I have met quite a few people who really do just want to shoot someone. They are looking for a reason.

How many of the same people in this thread were cool with that guy burning down the warehouse of the company that refused to pay it’s workers a livable wage?

Because I feel like a lot of the same people crying foul in this thread did absolutely not do that when that even happened.

It’s my view that open source is going to have to resort to stuff like this to survive. Because people aren’t going to stop using LLM’s and even if the bubble does burst they’re just gonna try to get by on local models and stolen data sets.

Theft. Its not even a secret.

https://9to5google.com/2023/05/07/google-failing-nest/

https://talk.tidbits.com/t/google-kills-off-nest-security-ecosystem/26216

https://www.howtogeek.com/884735/google-is-shutting-down-some-old-nest-devices-and-services/

Seems like every year or so Google messes with it and fucks over customers in the process.

Do. It. Do a flip. I want to see China buy a bunch of stock in publically trades American Automakers. Just so those automakers get forced out of the market too. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

For one thing I think record keeping.

Like. Part of the problem is he’s lying to investors. He hasn’t ever really cared about what the general public thinks except if it affects what investors think of his product. And it’s important to keep records of what he (and the others like him) says because eventually investors will want to sue (which is the only comeuppance these types ever get) if he doesn’t make good on his lies.

Keeping track of the lies proves that he did lie. Doesn’t do any of us any good if investors believe him and he manages to make a deal with them to sweep the lies under the rug in exchange for something that’s short term lucrative. But that’s why.

The general masses just need drama as far as I can tell. Hate sells. Well, that and I think people like him want to keep people like us afraid so we’re more controllable.

I don’t get that. It’s available on shorts only. On videos I get “Not Interested”.

Edit: It is available for me but only on some videos, and it’s hit or miss on mobile. In the browser (like another person said) it does work, so I suppose that’s something.

I still want to be able to block channels. A setting to filter out channels that are AI or just filter videos they use AI would be great but even then why can’t I block channels?

Did they get to cash in all their points?