The article is not a technical overview of AI's failures, it's about the organizational failures that lead to things like token leaderboards. I would argue that this article goes far beyond the "obvious" fact of token leaderboards and into the deeper problems faced by both vendors and companies trying to measure the efficacy of AI.
The ban on replaceable flavored pod vapes caused that. Such a bizarre rule and so wasteful. You couldn’t replace the battery on the pod vapes but at least you could reuse the recharge and reuse the battery.
>A problem for city kids maybe? My parents were smart enough to raise me somewhere more suited for children.
Implying that the only reason people with kids live in a city is because they're stupid? What in the world are you on about? I've read the below thread, and this is one of the most bizarre takes I've seen in a long time.
Tech companies are some of the largest and most influential companies in the world, and people are just now starting to understand what it means to have their lives influenced by wide-reaching algorithms. Sounds like a great topic for journalism to me.
Regardless of the motivation, NYT's recent algorithm-centric investigations (like the YouTube one a month or two back) are really interested and well-researched.
I was not comparing NYT to any other news outlet. It's an echo chamber regardless of the fact that conservative news sites also have echo chamber comment sections.
The David Brooks article was just an example. When Bernie Sanders was still campaigning every comment on Hillary/Bernie-related articles was about how the New York Times is wrong and that Bernie is the best, people will learn about the political revolution soon enough, etc. I was a huge fan of Bernie and I got bored of those comments instantly.
The New York Times comments are free from trolls and spam, but it's a frustratingly obvious echo chamber when it comes to politics. I'm a liberal guy but I can't stand it. David Brooks wrote an interesting column (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/opinion/the-great-affluenc...) a week or so ago and most of the comments are just bashing him for being a Republican, as if that has anything to do with the subject matter.
With all his talk about planting bombs, I'm sure they suspected that he was wearing a bomb vest to detonate when police moved in. I'm not sure how else they could have handled it.
Genuine question: how should streaming companies protect against their content being stolen/ripped/etc without DRM? What's the alternative? I'm sure it's in the contract of every streaming service that they have to protect the licensed content to the best of their ability. Saying "fuck the greedy media companies" doesn't help the streaming services that need to license content to survive. Considering almost half of all bandwidth (in the US at least) is used for streaming, I'd say it's pretty important to have a well-defined solution to enable streaming companies to do what they need to do.
You've made a negative comment in nearly every thread on this post - do you really hate Snapchat that much? Do you not see how some people might enjoy using it?
I just recently got into Snapchat. My fiance and I just snap each other during downtime at work, nothing major. It's a lot of fun but I'm not sure how they could monetize it beyond the sponsored filters they have now.
I use the first feature constantly. If I'm reading reddit comments at the bottom of the page, I can scroll to the top and a part of the original post and then snap back to where I was. I think Chrome actually removed this for a day or two and it really annoyed me.
How would AI writing help in any way?