Tbf it’s already write for admins only. But, if you completely remove write access that makes the file itself obsolete (there’s no use in a file that no one can edit) and if you restrict it to trusted installer / verified software, that’s not gonna eliminate Adobe.
Damn imagine someone writing an article about the amount of L’s you’re currently taking.
Have some decency for those birds please.
I like the idea but the US Stillhaus major issues with detainees being subjected to systematic sleep deprivation and other kinds of psychological torture.
There is an immense issue about “using it”, not on “detecting it and mitigating it”.
Btw usually the police just does stuff like this, prosecuters are annoyed but not brave enough to stand up against it, the judges often don’t know about it and defense attorneys have an uphill battle anyway when it comes to any issues before the court.
Yeah so assuming Springer makes enough money (pretty sure they sell their copies and there’s solid money there) they are absolutely able to get those systems in place before publishing. That’s telling.
I was gonna say, surely there’s a database of published works you could literally query to check for validity. I mean literally traditional algorithmic verification. Why the hell would you need an AI for that. AIs are for black box problems but this has been solved way back. This tells me whoever is in charge is more concerned with optics than with things going well or they are highly incompetent.
That is exactly what I was wondering.
And it gets even more complex, because suppose you have these mental conditions - your threshold for taking medicine and / or drugs is probably lower.
So right now there’s still a good chance causation can be inverse.
That said, very important to take these studies seriously. No one should care about being right, it will always be about getting it right.
I assume that’s sarcasm in the article?
I was gonna say, I know some families that inspire mind-altering drug use.
Yeah it’s deeply wrong on a technical, legal and ethical level. It violates a handful of doctrines in all of these disciplines.
Is it really that big of an issue? I just presume it scales in China. More people, more actual research and more faux science news, but all in the same proportions as in the western world.
Genuinely curious.
I would argue they are always off. But some are off in control by margin of error, and some are so bad they get invalidated with the next control measurements. And every bit of data has validated our current climate models. In fact the data is so clear, that we don’t need new models to verify climate change, but we are just looking at refining the scope of different timelines. Hell, we know since 1971 that climate change is dangerous.
That moment when your doctor runs sudo apt upgrade on your brain directly.
I wanna go camping with this shit so I can get revenge.
Yeah from my intuition it sounds like this file serves as a makeshift firewall / proxy. Allowing software to override it kinda makes this weak and basically useless for a lot of purposes.