Most comments here ignored the kids’ preference to play on the iPad. With that in mind, you may want to check out the Realms offering. I believe you get a 10 user server for ~$7. Note that is also highly fragmented, and there are different realms subscriptions for Java and Bedrock and also different tiers.
Depends on what your goals are with the family server, Realms may not be a good fit at all. But in terms of getting kids playing together simply and quickly, it’s the easiest way to go.
As a side note, I know kids who switched to Java after years of insisting only on Bedrock and sorely regretted not making the move much sooner. This is part of growing up these days.
> The only ostensible benefit is in the eyes of the AI-psychotic tinkerer, who knows no better, or in those of the clout-chasing developer farming likes on their LinkedIn posts.
This is not really the same at all. You still have to swipe, the value add here is apparently “building an emotional bond”. Together with the explicit goal of “dates with girls”, this actually feels incredibly nefarious.
This implies a long road to catch up. But seems to be that all one needs to do to be on the cutting edge is to integrate a few scripts that support a cutting edge model. Which you then converse with in natural language. So how higher will the bar to entry be five years from now?
Based on this article at least, he is not disagreeing with those claims, he is not even acknowledging they exist.
The original claim, as I understand it, is basically this: you can’t be an honest actor in a dishonest system.
And it’s not even necessary to claim that billionaires did something uniquely wrong to become billionaires. It’s just that their share of the exploitation is so, so, so much bigger.
This has nothing to do with “deepfakes”. These girls could have been attacked by aliens and be received with more credulity. There has to be a point where you understand that this behavior towards girls and women is simply being allowed.
One of the mothers says this quite explicitly:
> Calling the event rumors and speculation when a crime occurred was almost worse than the crime
It just occurred to me there's an even bigger missed opportunity with the rankings. Because every "survey question" is a 1 to 1 comparison between two concepts, the most interesting thing would be to see how different concepts stand up to each other. And perhaps also how consistent people are throughout their answers, and maybe how that correlates to trends in their choices.
The context or description shown for each "industry" is a massive injection of bias.
For example, Cannabis is "Cannabis cultivation, dispensaries, and marijuana-related businesses", while Sugary Food & Beverage are "Products associated with obesity, diabetes, and health concerns". So if you think there is also a positive side to sugar, the context makes it clear you are voting for the negative side. But the negative sides of Cannabis are left out of the context, so you're more likely to be neutral or positive about it.
Another example is Environmental Polluters, which are "Industries with major pollution, emissions, or environmental damage". And you also have Chemical Manufacturing, which is "Industrial chemical production and hazardous material processing". But there is no such thing as a "pollution and hazards" industry. So what are we voting for as "worst" here? Nitrogen and Cement? Industry in general?
And the rankings are just an ordered list, completely opaque. With all the overlap between the options, there has to be something actually interesting to do with the data.
Unrelated, but Buzz Out Loud too.