Desistance, i.e. "being convinced out of transness" is perfectly common, as mentioned in the article. I'm not aware of any studies on how therapy can affect this, but even if the therapy was merely helping the patient cope with their dysphoria for a period before exploring other options, that seems a far cry from saying "just deal with it".
I hear this recommended quite frequently, but I don't see it practiced much, nor do I really understand what is being recommended. No matter how you wrote your first API you can always introduce a /v2/ later, and no matter how good you get at versioning it's still much worse than maintaining a well-designed backwards-compatible API. If anyone has recommended reading on this I'd love to check it out.
Except he did play him, and only after that loss did he withdraw from the tournament and refuse to play with him again. The implication is clear to all that Carlsen suspects foul play in that game, I don't see the point in being coy about that now.
One presumes Magnus believed Niemann cheating in an OTB game wasn't possible; now he believes that's not the case and has decided that even OTB games aren't worth the time/effort/risk.
Yes, you can opt in, but the Ring mobile app insists on generating your passphrase for you instead of letting you choose your own. Which means Ring could still perfectly well know what your passphrase is, even though it's supposed to be "private", since it's their code in their app generating it. Sorry, not buying it.
Edit: Also, at least according to HowToGeek [1], you lose some significant features if you enable E2EE.
(Edit to edit: My Ring app gives me an even more comprehensive list of features that are disabled if you enable E2EE. Since among them is Shared Users, which is how my wife and I can both see our Ring videos, I don't see how this is any kind of actual support for E2EE. Surely a significant portion of Ring's customers have more than one family member who wants to have access to the videos.)
"jethrodaniel" does not appear to have the copyright to offer that license, but it's hard for Github to determine that in general, so I doubt they would be liable for the error.
Even if it's somehow available under an MIT license (which is questionable on the part of jethrodaniel), there's still infringement. MIT isn't public domain, it still has
> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
Replicating it without complying with those terms is still infringement.
this. People are being willfully blind here, like cult members looking dead-eyed at their leader and chanting "This is great" as they drink the kool-aid.
And from Microsoft no less, once outcast for mass poisoning.
Actually the legal system is evidence based. Microsoft has evidence that the code they are producing is licensed under MIT as far as they can reasonably know. There's no definitive way to know that who actually owns the original copyright. I could grant permission to use my repo, but maybe I got that code from someone else, who then got it from someone else and so on and so forth. It's a similar situation with stolen goods, if you unknowingly purchase stolen goods you usually cannot be charged for theft as long as there aren't obvious signs that it's stolen such as the goods being priced far below market value.
Microsoft has evidence that the code they are reproducing is MIT licensed, so are they intentionally violating that license or does this AI thing include the license and attribution in every snippet it generates?
Major aspects of copyright infringement are strict liability, like a lot of civil actions around damages. It doesn't matter if you thought it was OK, there's still a damaged party that needs compensation according to the law. At best you'll simply avoid the criminal and punitive penalties.
No, PornHub doesn't have liability in a lot of cases because of 17 § 512, but has still had to deal with liability in general, which is why they nuked some 80% of their library not backed by verified individuals a while back.
A huge part of 17§512 is the DMCA takedown process mainly in 17§512(c)(3). Does Microsoft even have the ability to truly remove training data from the model? Or do they have to retrain on each DMCA takedown?
I personally don't want to have to upload proof of identity to GitHub and a signed document swearing that I own the copyright to all the code I upload to GitHub, or proof that I coded it. We need to be careful what we wish for.
> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
If they had a reasonable basis for believing they had a license they're in the clear. "I didn't know" might not be enough but "I had good reasons to think otherwise" is.
I’m not a lawyer but my understanding these are torts so all you have to prove is Microsoft has liability. I think this would be easy to prove due to the way neural networks work since it’s just a way of performing a search.
Since it’s a tort I don’t think you have to prove they should have know it would return copyrighted code, the fact that it does is enough to have liability.
I agree with your general point, but I have to add that that example "compromise" sounds highly unsatisfactory for the wife. Not only does she have to accept the dirty dishes, but the simple task of putting them in the dishwasher immediately has been replaced by the fraught emotional labour of managing and enforcing a cleanup rota. I think the OP is right that he should have just taken the L on this issue, and perhaps on some other standard of cleanliness she should be the one to compromise.
In my experience cold starts don't affect the p99 if you have substantial traffic, because you have enough lambdas consistently running that cold start rate is ~0.1%. P99.9 also matters though!
Do you have any solution for RSS to Kindle? I would happily pay to have my RSS feeds delivered straight to my Kindle. In fact I just today paid for https://app.newslettertokindle.com/ for very similar reasons.
Good point. I guess the reason the author finds removing from lists to be relevant is because there is no Set structure in the Go standard library. They should use a `map[t]bool`, but that is non-obvious to many programmers.
Unfortunately, map[t]bool (or map[t]struct{}) only works for special structs that happen to have equality defined for them. It's not a general purpose solution, it's just a hack.
They're interested [1], but as usual, giving some though on how to do that in a privacy-maximising way:
> Thanks, we know [backup] is a big deal and think about it a lot. We're working on ways to do it that would be privacy preserving, and in the mean time we've got the p2p device transfer you mention. We'll keep working to make it better!
It appears you've linked to a comment about the lack of a way to backup signal messages on iOS. That is separate(ish) from the importing of messages from WhatsApp.
So, no, they're not interested in WhatsApp import (per the closed ticket liked by the parent).
Additionally, the statement from signal is just PR spew. It boils down to "Nah, we won't make a way to do that.". The "privacy preserving" bit is nonsense because they have an export/import to a file on android.
Oh whoops, my bad - I was under the impression it was about import/export of Signal messages in general. There's been so much news about Signal recently that I'm getting comments mixed up, it seems.
