I think the bigger point is that it’s like a guy in the room. ChatGPT shows that the industry is graduating from Turing test territory to IQ test territory, and a lot of people are really hung up on the fact it’s failing the latter.

I’ve been in car crashes before but that doesn’t mean I’m ok with increasing their frequency and severity.

That article only says it’s the first this century.

As long as you define century as 2000-2100, and not 1922-2022...

“This century” is fixed to start at 2000 until 2100, same as this decade is 2020–2029.

“Last hundred years” for the former interpretation.

Or 2001 until 2101, if you're being pedantic about the Nth century AD/CE.

(Because there is no year 0 in the AD/CE calendar, so the first century in the calendar starts in year 1, the second in 101, etc...)

That is how "this century" would typically be understood

Perhaps if they try to force you to arbitration you can push back and demand proof that you agreed to their terms, which is conveniently achieved by creating an account.

Arguably, if the court ends up agreeing that you did have an account and that Valve needs to give control of it back to you, would that not be evidence that you had agreed to the terms, then broken them by rejecting arbitration? (Leading to Valve being able to take your account away because you broke the ToS.)

I’ve been using iPhone 6S since it was the flagship and I still don’t know any 3D Touch operations or shortcuts. I actually had to look up just now to double-check that this phone even has it and it isn’t disabled. I’m sure I could find a cheat sheet if I cared but generally I think of “intuitive” as being something you’d discover naturally at least once in nearly 7 years of daily use.

It doesn’t matter what it’s about though - if they were first at something then barring time travel they will always be the first, no matter how many more do it.

"according to our best understanding of the boundary" -- they are the first to cross the boundary unless our understanding of the boundary changes, and then there is the small possibility that something faster can reach the "real" boundary faster.

This makes me wonder if there might be a project out there that can compile Verilog to a schematic or netlist for 74-series logic.

Edit: unsurprisingly, the answer is yes - http://pepijndevos.nl/2019/07/18/vhdl-to-pcb.html

I hear this a lot, but what jurisdictions and why? On the face of it, it seems batshit insane to me that there would be a place where I can’t waive my property rights on something.

Germany, for one: (PDF warning) https://rd-alliance.org/sites/default/files/cc0-analysis-kre...

> With regard to the transferability and the waiving of the copyright the German copyright law can be considered as one of the strictest systems in the world. Main reason is the strict monistic approach the German copyright law bases on. Key feature of this approach is the concept that, in principle, the copyright/author’s right itself can neither be transferred to another person nor waived by the author herself. The German author’s right consists of two parts, the moral rights and the exploitation rights. The moral rights are – as a rule – personal rights that are bound to the person of the creator (or, after her death, her legal heirs), i.e. they can neither be transferred nor waived. Since moral and exploitation rights are considered as inseparable parts of the author’s right as a whole (monistic approach) the exploitation rights cannot – in principle – transferred or waived by contract as well. However it is naturally possible to license the use of the work i.e. to transfer rights to use a protected work even on a large scale. Such licenses can practically lead (nearly) to the same result as an assignment or waiver of rights.

Germany would be one example. Public Domain exists, but only as the state something enters after copyright expired naturally 70 years after the death of the author. You can't release things into public domain.

As for why: nobody considered that case when writing our copyright laws, and nobody bothered to change it. Copyright as designed can't be transferred (except through inheritance), to avoid exploitation of the original creator. As a consequence you can't really get rid of it, you can only grant licenses.

It's hardly the only right you can't get rid of, and CC0 tries to deal with some of them, like the right to one's one image which in the shortest possible form says that you can't create or publish a picture of a person without their consent (but as you can imagine is way more complicated than that). You could say that the German legal framework isn't about maximizing freedom, it's about maximizing happiness, and sometimes being able to give away a right or freedom will on balance cause more harm than good.

They have way more patience than I do. I’d have pointed out pretty quickly that this “customer” is not a customer of the gfortran team and is therefore irrelevant to the discussion.

In this case, developers are in the powerful position to say: "I don't care about your nuclear weapons, pay me or forget it."

I feel it’s even more accurate to say they are human behaviors that take advantage of religion (or any other available power structure). In a world dominated by religion they take religious form. If we remove religion from power or power from religion, they will take whatever form allows them to thrive in the new system.

Exactly, these behaviors are memetic and allow a group to continue to exist: groups without some or all of these features certainly exist but don't have the robustness or cohesion to keep themselves together for 100s or 1000s of years.

Religion groups have done a very good job at fulfilling their primary purpose: to continue to exist (this purpose is not unique to religions, as continued existence is the purpose of all groups whether they accept it or not)