It is responsive to your question on why the government should have something to say about price negotiations between producers and retailers of frozen pizzas.
Cover charge for a shoe store is an interesting idea. I hate shopping, especially with crowds, and probably wouldn't mind, especially if it went towards a purchase, even partially. (This willingness is learned, probably only true for me since my 30s, and not strictly correlated to my income bracket.)
I often buy gas at the BP with a $0.03/gal higher price than the Shell across the street. Guess which one has a longer line more full of gas guzzlers.
Yet absolute price per GB isn't the full story when the popular tools accessible for the general public require more RAM for the same task today as compared to the past. You won't get far using the latest version of MS Word on a desktop with specs from 1999, or running MS Word 97 to edit academic essays turned this year.
Even for background services, rather than the general public, I would not attempt running an email server with the same RAM as I used in the 90s, 00s, or 10s.
> this isnt putting a quarter in a machine. thats what we already have today.
What have I missed where I can, today, feasibly pay $0.25 at a time, online, regardless of other factors such as privacy, without putting down a larger balance at a time from which $0.25 is deducted?
I disagree that the berating example is in any substantial way similar to whistleblowing.
I believe we are more on the same page than not, but I caution you to more closely evaluate an employee's obligations on how and when they speak about their employer, whether in public or where there's a chance of private speaking becoming public, regardless of the name or persona used.
I include whistleblowing, because some whistleblowing is not legally protected and, from an employment perspective, some whistleblowing requires that certain steps were first attempted or considered.
I've had to do that re-evaluation myself, from the employer side, and it changed my mind in some ways, even from my perspective as an employee.
(This sounds one sided only because we're not bringing up any employer obligations. I'm not in HR, but that re-evaluation more firmly entrenched my belief that HR is often a necessary evil.)
Compared to current age verification laws, I agree that a self-declared header would be better both technically and socially. Parenting is daunting for the vast majority (including myself), and that solution would make it easier for parents to supervise their children, but I strongly disagree it's unrealistic to generally do so today.
> I should be able to even berate my employer, as long as I'm not doing it from a persona that's directly tied to my employer e.g. my real name or git handle etc. They might not like it, but they sure as shit shouldn't be able to fire me for it.
There are many things you should be able to do publicly without repercussion from your employer. However, your example is berating them, and I'm taking that literally: "to criticize in an angry manner".
If I read this correctly, then you believe your employer should be able to fire you if you angrily criticize them in public under your name. I agree in principle, that could damage their trust in your ability to do your job. Depending on specifics, that damage could be enough to justify firing you.
I don't understand why doing so anonymously should change the potential damage to their trust in you, if they later learn you said what you did.
The ContextLM model is a very small language model that is trained for a single language. It's used to improve the quality of predictions by eliminating nonsensical words given the preceding words in the sentence. It only requires text data for training.
What? You can't give access to that kind of power to just anyone with $5,000/month.
These people should be trained and licensed before they get access. Thankfully, Anthropic has worked with regulators to develop the appropriate courses to maintain your license -- don't worry, the series is cheap when you buy all up through OT XVII. And because Anthropic has been approved as Security Overseer, we will take care of reporting back to the license bureau on our monitoring of your work to ensure you meet your ongoing license responsibilities and are able to keep your license.
Which regulators? You know, the new agency led by several of our former mid-level executives. With relationships like that, we were honored to lead the Industry Coalition that donated the final-draft regulations.
What you're describing applies to coffee shops where a latte has the same amount of coffee regardless of the cup size.
Others are mostly describing someone who makes coffee for themself at home or in a break room. That person likely chooses a cup size depending on how much they coffee they want, how frequently they want a refill, etc.