Yeah, force them to fund with their own money a marketing campaign with specified outreach or certain length to specified media (TV, internet, print, etc) for a specified amount of time that lists what they said and what they were wrong about.
TO’s comment truly is a mélange of victimhood and jingoism that, curiously, is as American as apple pie.
As if a joke more dated than boomer humour is a concerted psyop to discredit French people in “the marketplace of ideas.” Not to mention the myopic view of America in the second half. Baffling.
Anyway, hope the bundle helps those devs hold on and push through some positive change.
I’m confused by this comment. “The original is even better” reads like you are informing TO about the original. But you’d expect them to be aware of it, what with them referencing the joke nickname and saying “a new variation”.
It’s mostly confusing because there are clearer ways of posting the original comic for the uninformed than referencing the only person certain to have seen it.
I find it as funny as the original post
I wouldn’t even really call this recursion. This is closer to a wrapper around the enjoy function to set variables so that “enjoy” doesn’t throw an error.
The only concern is how much the cost of training the model changes if it got a significant kickstart from previous, very-expensive training. I was interested because it was said to be comparable for a fraction of the cost. "Open"AI can suck sand.
I may be on the wrong side of history but I can’t see what other role a car could get in the film industry except vehicle.
The question is why does Elon have access to it?
Perhaps “Elon helped” is Musk-washing “Elon put us in contact with the folks who could get us access to those videos”. But that manbaby likes getting his clammy grabbers in the mix, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he personally demanded access and handed it over.
But what’s even stronger than a gorilla? Two gorillas??
The assumption that every person looking for a quirky domain was conscious of and complicit in the fraught relationship of the claimaint countries is absolutely untenable.
This is weird take on an op-ed. OP didn’t alter the title. The only ways I can conceive of a headline being “misleading” is when it declares a falsity (this doesn’t; it’s an opinion) or doesn’t match the content of the titled text (this doesn’t; it matches the text).