It's not difficult to communicate the difference between losing all future rights and settling a dispute over an incident that has already happened. I don't know why you'd act like it's a huge challenge to understand the difference.
I don't see signing away your right to access the legal system as an essential part of a settlement. You could just sign a settlement that says, here's what happened, here's the remedy we've agreed to. And then if one party decides to sue later on, the existence of the settlement could be used by the other side as extremely strong evidence that the matter was already concluded to the mutual satisfaction of both parties, and the lawsuit should be dismissed. But it would be "this was already handled" rather than "the plaintiff gave up their right to address this matter in court."
As far as the military goes, that's very much a special case, and it should remain so. The fact that you can give up certain fundamental legal rights by joining the military is not an argument for being able to give up certain fundamental legal rights by accepting a click-through agreement from Sony.
Interesting read. I speculate that Yudkowski argued that it would be bad for artificial intelligence to 'believe' we wouldn't let it out of the box. It's fascinating because there's not really a first-order argument to be let out.
With respect to Dr. Wilson, most of this reads like "A three hour movie didn't include every detail I've enjoyed during my lifetime of study." Every suggested addition just reminded me how bad I had to go to the restroom by the end of the film. It reads more like comic book fans complaining about film adaptations than a serious review.
Some of the criticism is just downright terrible. Knocking the film for not putting wheels on the Trojan Horse is just wrong, there's no other way to put it. There's no basis for the wheels in Homer, and the Trojans dragging the horse is one of the most visceral depictions of the story I've ever seen. It's something I've heard people talking about so it definitely resonated with people.
I had to stop reading at this point: "Defying the gods is noble and brave when Odysseus blinds Polyphemus, son of Poseidon". Just false. The exact same thing happens to them as in the source material. Polyphemus cries out to his father Poseiden, who punishes the crew. Odysseus's men literally say this.
> Defying the gods is noble and brave when Odysseus blinds Polyphemus
Here is my reading: when the action unfolds it is indeed depicted as noble, where Odysseus saves his men, and brave, where the men take on a fearsome but incoherent giant being. By the time they make it to their ship, though, the realization dawns on them and that's when we all know it was neither noble nor brave. And, the men are all doomed from the start, according to prophecy.
The action/adventure film depicted brave and noble actions. The mortal humans on Earth were saving life and limb of their own kind, for their wives and children.
Context matters.
The spiritual reality was far different. The unseen truths were pre-existing; the truths were partly known to them already; and the spiritual reality was revealed later on, but their darkened intellect and concupiscence caused them to act as warriors and in solidarity and brotherhood, rather than following the Divine Plan.
It's not depicted as brave or noble in the film. They are quietly sneaking around, whispering and miming to each other. Once injured, Polyphemus immediately speaks, leading the crew to realize this was wrong.
They're selling it for AI. Unless retro-nostalgia explodes and gamers are overwhelmed by a desire to pay for tokens (more than ai users), that doesn't change anything.
It wouldn't have been. I had an N9, it was amazing, but even before the "burning platform", it was clearly too late to the market share and app races. Consider that it didn't really have much of a head start over the Windows phone, which MS poured so much money into, and even they couldn't get their foot in the door.
Nokia had active developer relations; at WhatsApp we were planning to build for the N9, but ended up not doing it, because the platform was cancelled before the retail release and the retail release was limited.
I'm sure some of the gushing praise it got was because it was a last hurrah, but if Nokia had actually supported it, I'm sure it would have sold tens of millions of units. Nokia sold ~100 million smart phones in 2010 and ~ 77 million smart phones in 2011 [1], Apple sold ~ 72 million iPhones in 2011 [2]. While the trend was going the wrong way, tens of millions of mobile users would be hard to ignore.
> Nokia had active developer relations; at WhatsApp we were planning to build for the N9, but ended up not doing it, because the platform was cancelled before the retail release and the retail release was limited.
WhatsApp was on Windows Phone though.
Instagram was not on Windows Phone, which hurt it, but there is no indication it would have come to MeeGo either.
reply