The article mentions that. They supposedly released 2 versions, one “enhanced” to help make the relevant parts of the image easier to see, which certainly matches the description of “modified” and the other, the same footage but described as “raw” and. It enhanced in the same way with implication being that it wasn’t “modified”.

There are a lot of plausible a d likely explanations for the Adobe metadata schema information that is in the file that don’t involve deceptively manipulating footage to hide something that was in that footage before public presentation, then again, given the circumstances and supposed rationale behind publicly presenting this footage, failing to release the footage in a way that wouldn’t have metadata modified from the camera original source files is not a good look and then failing to answer questions about makes it look even worse. This is is especially true when, although there is no answer they could give that would actually totally convince everyone, there are as I said many plausible explanations they could have offered and yet they were just silent.

Ironically, as is so often the case with anything like this, depending on the interpretive lens you’re using this issue with the metadata helps confirm either assertion, that there was cover up and Epstein was murdered, or that there was no such cover up and he really did kill himself. Obviously, the fact that it’s modified lends credence to the idea they’re hiding something because one might expect that if they weren’t it’d be easy to just supply the footage with metadata more reflective of a surveillance system than Adobe software. However one could also say that, modifying metadata in a way that is undetectable should actually be relatively easy and the fact that that couldn’t be bothered to do that, or didn’t know how, or never thought of metadata being present in the first place suggests it’s not untoward so much as technically unsophisticated and sloppy - too sloppy for competent conspiracists. On the other hand, they could also be sloppy AND conspiracists who just did an awful job, nothing about that seems altogether unlikely either since the entire thing unnamed forced conspired to have people believe is very suspicious to begin with so not exactly an expertly conceived plan, more improvisational and done in a hurry which would kind of track with them botching later actions to take the heat off.

Got him! Send in the seals.

That’s really not fair or helpful to the poor kid. It may be nonsense but it’s very real and has a very real impact on his life. Those little monsters truly will go out of their way to make him miserable and sad as it may be keeping a low profile and reducing the number of things they can pick on can be a way not to be targeted. The idea that of telling him he “should be better than that” is just adding to the burden he’s already carrying of being forced to coexist with those little sociopaths. Is it somehow his fault?

Wait there’s sequels? No way.

That’s all well and fine but do you really choose to abbreviate shampoo as “poo”?

Does that make Windows Millenium Edition, equivalent to Windows 1000? If so we’ve have some pretty weird-ass technological developments. 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, 1000, 7, 8, 10, 11. If you were just tracking history through windows versions you’d think we’d gone through some sort rapid technological expansion followed by a civilization destroying catastrophe, followed by a very long road to recovery that we’re still in the midst of.

I’m more unhappy with messaging apps that notify people if you’ve read a message. It did have a positive side effect in that with Facebook, once they introduced that feature sometime around 09 or something, it caused me to reduce my use of the messaging capabilities significantly but frankly I’m not sure that’s really what Facebook or I really wanted. It’s a common feature in messaging applications and I fucking hate it. I need to read the message to decide if I want people to know if I’ve seen it and I can’t do that without telling them I’ve seen it.

In Australia Clive Palmer is famous for constantly sending out texts during his campaigns, people complain they got multiple per day. I wasn’t aware there was any law against it here, in fact I thought people had been saying it OUGHT to be illegal.

Oh

Hmm but that article says that in both cases the jets were lost due to some embarrassing fuck ups that seemed to have nothing to with combat, with the first being literally dropping one in the ocean 🤦and this latest one being overshooting a landing and having to eject while the plane ran off the end of the carrier in to the sea.

I didn’t hear anything before now about this issue and am not well informed at this moment. Some preliminary reading from a CNN article indicates that the Houthi leadership acknowledged the agreement praising it as a victory because it separates US support from Israel. I didn’t immediately find anything regarding further attacks since the announcement but also I see that the agreement was specifically about halting the bombing campaign in exchange for the cessation of attacks on specifically American assets in the region, which I think would be why the Houthi leadership were quick to call this a victory. Are the attacks you’re referring to on American assets?

I don’t know, if I’m the alien in this scenario and could plainly see they don’t have the ability to traverse interstellar distances I wouldn’t be concerned from a personal safety stand point about making first contact with the intelligent life on a distant planet even if they did show they still had problems with conflict. I’m obviously projecting my own assumptions based on living on Earth but, on Earth inter and intra species conflicts naturally occurr across the kingdoms of life (maybe even all of them?) so it’s doesn’t seem that unusual.

Maybe if life, and intelligent life particularly, is common and perhaps intelligent civilizations commonly eventually figure out how to avoid conflict, I wouldn’t be presumptuous and judgemental because this particular one hadn’t got that far yet. It would seem that’s something they likely all have to go through and that’s just operating on the arbitrary assumption that civilizations somehow do tend to figure out a way to overcome conflict, it could just as well be that they typically don’t given how hard it seems to be, so the would be aliens here likely have or have had conflicts of their own.

Look lady you had a pretty good run with getting rich AND famous by marrying a rock star and you even leveraged a later in life tv career out of being that woman married to that guy but I seriously wouldn’t push it when your notoriety is on such tenuous grounds.

I realise the dumbass here is the guy saying programmers are ‘cooked’, but there’s something kind of funny how the programmer talks about how people misunderstand the complexities of their job and how LLMs easily make mistakes because of an inability to understand the nuances of what he does everyday and understands deeply. They rightly point out how without their specialist oversight, AI agents would fail in ridiculous and spectacular ways, yet happily and vaguely adds as a throw away statement at the end “replacing other industries, sure.” with the exact same blitheness and lack of personal understanding with which ‘Ace’ proclaims all programmers cooked.

That’s got to be the key to all this, specificity, it’s great that it’s got natural language processing to simplify things but sometimes that’s what’s actually getting in the way. What they should really do is have a special version of chatGPT for programming where users can interact with it in a very special form of structured English. It’s still natural language, this is the future after all, none of that zeroes and ones crap like the stone age, but just highly specific words with carefully defined meanings particular to making repeatable and executable steps in a pattern that does the same thing every time in response to inputs to produce outputs. You could then “speak” to one of these LLM things using this carefully structured English to automate specific tasks. The real kicker would be that you could tell it to chain together a bunch of these tasks you’ve had it automate for you to build up in to something much more complex. This would really harness the power of AI because at each step it’s made it for you, with minimal input from yourself because you’re just ‘talking’ to it in a very specific way. Admittedly this approach would be a little bit less obvious for new users than a standard LLM, but if an average person kept doing this for like a year or two they’d get pretty adept at this manner of speech, it’d be kind of like learning another language and people have been doing that for as long as there’s been people, I speak in a language everyday, I’m doing it right now. We could make it easier too, we could have courses and schools to help people get better at it faster.

woohoo no fascists then

Yeh, arguably and to a limited extent, the problems he’s having now aren’t the result of the decision to use AI to make his product so much as the decision to tell people about that and people deliberately attempting to sabotage it. I’m careful to qualify that though because the self evident flaw in his plan even if it only surfaced in a rather extreme scenario, is that he lacks the domain specific knowledge to actually make his product work as soon as anything becomes more complicated than just collecting the money. Evidently there was more to this venture than just the building of the software, that was necessary to for it to be a viable service. Much like if you consider yourself the ideas man and paid a programmer to engineer the product for you and then fired them straight after without hiring anyone to maintain it or keep the infrastructure going or provide support for your clients and then claimed you ‘built’ the product, you’d be in a similar scenario not long after your first paying customer finds out the hard way that you don’t actually know anything about your own service that you willingly took money for. He’s discovering he can’t actually provide the service part of the Software as a Service he’s selling.

Yeh it’s going to be every voter and non voter getting drafted so it’s really not a rational thing to wish for angry or otherwise.

I don’t live in the states but there’s similar systems in some department stores here in Australia and I suspect, but don’t know, that applicable law in these cases is broadly similar. The store and their employees aren’t law enforcement and can’t arrest you or have any legal recourse for you ignoring their demands to stop and allow your receipt to be checked. They likely also have the right to refuse service to you and deny you entry to their premises and so long as this isn’t being done for a small number of specifically forbidden reasons (such as on the basis of race for example) they don’t need a legal justification to do so. This would mean that refusing to comply with their receipt checking policy might be enough if they see fit, to decide to deny you entry to their stores going forward. Many large department stores are incorporating facial recognition and don’t it seems feel the need for proper informed consent beyond some printed signage saying that but entering you’re consenting, so the practicality of them doing this is at least a little bit higher these days but I guess there’s no way to assess how likely this really is.

ok, meet in the middle, shove a firecracker up his arse and attach some wings to him.