I would guess your use-case is a statistical anomaly. If most of the images that are saved are saved by people who like them best, which is most likely the case, enough data will erase the problem.
That just sounds like pattern recognition with extra variables. Subdividing people into groups and then analyzing them certainly doesn't sound like a task that a machine will struggle with. Why should the algorithm need to be able to see the hidden "why" when most of us creative types can't see it or define it either? It's just a function of having observed enough people of a certain type. You want to generate something that will impress the people I'm targeting? Just analyze the posts of all my followers on social media. Analyze the content that is "liked" by people in my demographic range and with close proximity to where I live. Analyze the works of creators who belong to my generation and who listen to the same music as me. Do that all nearly instantly and then offer me a selection of options picked from those various methods. I don't expect "good taste" will be hard to conjure up. I already can't tell that a lot of these octopus drawings weren't created by a talented human, and we're still early and unsophisticated in our data analytics.
Why should there be legislation? Do you want to restrict what people can do, just to force them to employ artists and writers? We could also forbid people from filling the gas tanks in their own cars, to protect the job of gas station attendant, but nobody wants to live in New Jersey.
We'll have to automate childcare to make that happen. Otherwise, the birthrates of the rest of the world will follow the countries with the highest standards of living on a wild plunge into unsustainability.
Have you ever seen a UBI proposal that would give people so much money that they don't have to do anything? We would never be able to come up with that much money to give out.
It's more like giving them even less money than Bill Gates gives his kids, so they still have to work, but they "don’t have to do anything for money but that they do have to do something" as you put it.
another way that word is commonly used is to indicate the person who has a responsibility; the one who is tasked with handling a situation. ie "who is responsible for cleaning up this mess?"
I take it that's what was meant by the notion that you're responsible for everything that happens to you. In this case it has nothing to do with praise or blame. Rather, it means that whether something happened to you by chance or through your own fault, the onus to clean up the mess falls upon you.
I'm not convinced that long-term thinking isn't a strategy that can be taught. Cognitive traits may make it come naturally to some people, but I would describe it as more of a "habit" than an "ability"
If those people could move into positions that can pay better, they already would have done so, no? Eliminating their jobs through automation isn't going to get them promoted, it's going to get them fired and unemployed
Is that supposed to be a reasonable question? Why isn't anyone smart enough to invent a battery with several orders of magnitude better storage capacity than the current ones?
Anyone at any time can see the wallet address that created the NFT. It's trivial for any author or creator to publish their wallet address; it's simply a short hash value. That's the "verification outside of the blockchain" that you seem to think is such a stumbling point. I would suggest thinking more on the subject if it isn't obvious to you that this has value.
Actually this is quickly becoming the standard. Once you mint an NFT on opensea, you have the option to "freeze" the metadata, which transfers the image and everything else to IPFS storage.
You don't think there's value to the application owner? They get a secondary market for the accounts in their application that they don't have to manage and they get royalties automatically paid to them for every resale. The scarcity of accounts drives up the value of those accounts, which also financially benefits the application holder because now they can sell the extra accounts they held on to for more money, and they get bigger royalties on every resale. And on the consumer side, someone is more willing to buy in to check it out because if they get tired of it or they don't like it or they beat the game and want to move on they know they can sell their account easily.
And on top of all that, assets from one application can be integrated into another application. If I build a game and I allow people to use the "sword of NFT" they have from another game in my game then I've created a big incentive for people who like that other game to also play mine.
They don't have to, generally speaking. OpenSea does that for them, and issues a blue checkmark to items belonging to the collection of the verified key.
Google recently changed the hours of operation on my business' Google My Business listing to an hour later than I had it set to. I have no idea why; I certainly didn't tell them to. We found out when we got some angry calls from customers who showed up after we were closed. It's hard to explain to someone that we don't own our own listing on Google, and that we're at their mercy to approve the changes we submit and hope they don't make their own arbitrary updates.
I agree, but I think most of us will always remain averse to subscription models. Especially now that everyone seems to be asking for them. While I MIGHT in the future consider paying for premium youtube, I certainly won't be doing it for the various newspapers, like the NYT, who paywall their articles after X reads. I'm just not interested in being tied down like that and incentivized to consume more of their content than I already do. It's a shame that the micro-payment systems that have been theorized about on here for the last decade still haven't come to fruition. I'd pay 5 cents to read an interesting article, or a couple cents to watch a video. Maybe a layer 2 protocol with no transaction fees sitting on top of a cryptocurrency can finally solve this before another decade goes by.
My best purchase was the Onewheel XR. Easy, fun, convenient transportation. Electric powered to reduce my carbon footprint, as I now get around town without my car unless I'm transporting more than I can carry in one hand. One year later and I still love it and use it every day for both commuting and recreational trail riding.
How do we the people fight these drug dog abuses? Politicians generally aren't interested in touching something like this. I'd love to put some money to work on the issue. Is there a foundation dedicated to suing police departments? Is that even a viable avenue to make a change?
Kidnapping a Russian national on Russian soil might be doable, but I doubt we would risk the potential political fallout in 99.9% of ransomware cases. If the pipeline attack doesn't provoke it then I don't know what it will take
But isn't a bet on a prediction market open to anyone? Unless the assassin took the bet and killed the target moments before the deadline, couldn't a casual observer jump in on the action after they learned of the target's death?
There's a great reason to discourage one and not the other: There are lots of people out there who have been victims of sexual violence, and these depictions would do emotional harm to them. On the other hand, there are exactly zero people out there who have been victims of lethal violence and might now be hurt if they play your game.
I agree, but doing so would make an interesting game. A war that's being fought by 2 evenly matched AIs, and your job is to handle the logistics on your side to give it the edge?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you would only need greater than 2/3 of the amount of Ether currently staked, not 2/3 of the total amount of Ether. The amount of staked Ether probably would be less than 10% of the total issued Ether, maybe much less as staking rewards go down.
It is hoped among Ethereum enthusiasts that moving from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake in Ethereum 2.0 will solve those massive energy usage problems without introducing vulnerabilities into the system.