My goal of the cameras, which my neighbours know about, is not protecting me. It's protecting us.
I point cameras at their houses, at their doors & driveways from my property. Why? Because they can't install a camera on my house, but I can. Nobody has a problem. There's no distrust. There's cameras pointed right back at my home, too. We watch each other, because having more than one camera point of view creates a better security for all of us. I also have them watching at my door, specifically so I can see who is at the door, when mail gets delivered, or when packages get dropped off.
None of us have the delusion that we're all spying on each other. We're watching out for each other.
I'm not trying to play contrarian, but I agree with your parent.
If a neighbor wanted to install a camera pointed in the direction of my house and I could tell they were asking as a formality, I'd be nice about it. I'd be even nicer if we discussed my concerns before the final choice and they did not respect my wishes. It is their property and I'm not one to make a fuss, especially if there is no legal recourse.
However, in my head, I'd be furious and take it as a clear sign that they lack trust in the community and that they misunderstand what privacy means.
Being a good neighbor often means not rocking the boat, especially if you want to maintain healthy relationships. That isn't an endorsement of being passive, but an understanding that there are often bigger fish to fry. Banking their good will for a rainy day when I need coalitional support for something
In thinking a bit more about how to put this (I agree with you) --
My point was that cameras destroy trust.
You don't demonstrate trust in your child by putting a webcam in their bedroom and scanning their internet traffic. Maybe that's necessary for security in your mind, but it's not *trust*.
> I point cameras at their houses, at their doors & driveways from my property
Good god!
If a neighbour insisted on filming me and my family every time we left our front door, I'd either think they had a mental illness (paranoia) or were a bloody perv and in need of percussive attitude readjustment.
It should always show its current state. If a button is doubling as a status display, it needs to display current status, that's the entire point of a button doubling as displaying information.
Would you flip a breaker to the "ON" position in order to turn it off, or would you expect the breaker to display its current state of being ON/OFF?
Because if I can rewrite my printer to not intentionally be a total piece of shit, the company gets less money by intentionally expiring or wasting ink, DRM locking ink cartridge brands, or "service needed" bricking the device after a period of time.
There's also the matter of lawsuits. If you get a device, they're not supporting updates, so you go get a 3rd party update and it ruins the device, the RMA costs the manufacture, but worse, the customer(s) may file a (class action) lawsuit against the company over the problem of being unable to find the official firmware/driver updates, causing people to ruin their hardware, get RMA rejections, or not even being aware of an RMA process and simply buying another one.
Personally, I'd rather there be open source drivers/firmware for everything from day one, but to look at both sides, I fully understand the liability and why that's something that only exists in the hobbiest world.
>> Why is it not compulsory to release the source code from day 1? If you're making a driver it's because you're selling hardware, that's where your profit and value is. Commingling the two leads to perverse incentives and conflicts of interest.
> Because if I can rewrite my printer to not intentionally be a total piece of shit, the company gets less money by intentionally expiring or wasting ink, DRM locking ink cartridge brands, or "service needed" bricking the device after a period of time.
That sounds exactly like the "perverse incentives and conflicts of interest" that the parent comment mentioned. I don't think they're asking why it isn't required now, but why it _shouldn't_ be required. What you're saying sounds more compelling as an argument in favor of what they propose, not in favor of the status quo.
The company can create a way to void the warranty or not take responsibility and leave it to you if 3rd party modifications or drivers are used, but not outright prevent them and make them a pain to the users. Something like how Android ROMs and rooting used to be.
> Because if I can rewrite my printer to not intentionally be a total piece of shit, the company gets less money by intentionally expiring or wasting ink, DRM locking ink cartridge brands, or "service needed" bricking the device after a period of time.
This is exactly the kind of perverse incentives that I'm talking about though. And this kind of misbehavior happens way more than someone installing a 3rd party update that bricks someone's device.
I'm not sure how it'll hold up in law to claim copyright violations against something that wasn't created by a person. It'll really depend on the lawyers and judge's interpretation of written law. But I'm curious to see what comes of this.
Did he ever use AI to generate music? As opposed to crafting and using an algorithm, in which case the computer is just an instrument, like synthesizer is.
That isn't my interpretation, nor did I ever make that statement. That IS infact a valid definition of copyright infringement. The source material is copyrighted and you're making a literal copy of it via photocopier. I don't know how you twisted the logic on that to conclude that would not be infringement.
However, it does also depend what you do with the photocopies, merely photocopying a book and keeping it privately is on par with copying a music CD as a backup. The infringement occurs when you're reusing it as your own, such as selling, publishing, or broadcasting the copyrighted material.
What I stated is that generated art such as images/music/photos that are by a non human cannot be copyrighted. A photocopier isn't generating anything, it's a copy, it's replication and it isn't generating a new thing.
My personal opinion is that AI generated artwork should be treated as equal to fanart when generating copyright influenced material.
They won't admit it's static, but it is. I've had the same IP for three years since moving into this house. In that time, I've had power outages lasting for days, IP was still the same. I've replaced my router and the assigned IP didn't change. The only way it can change is if they replace their media converter "fiber jack" or you call or go to their store to ask them to change your IP.
Most pet owners are well aware of the info in these articles. It's obvious my cat can think, learn, remember, and recall. When she wants attention, she comes to me, pats her paw against me for my attention, and then hops into my lap or awaits me to pick her up. She doesn't go to the couch and expect attention. It's easy to see that she wanted attention, and consciously sought me out, and socially interacted with me to get my attention. No cat owner would think that to be an autonomous or subconscious/thoughtless behaviour.
However, as an owner, none of my interactions with my cat are scientific, recorded research, or anything that helps to prove things. Again, anyone who has taken care of animals knows they make friends, enemies, socialize, think, and even love. But research in the field is still relatively new, these articles are relatively "no shit" to pet owners, but they're saying that there's now scientific research about these behaviours.
I don't know what Windows 11 Pro version has bitlocker on by default, but none of the systems I have at home enabled it as a default setting. Whether upgrading from 10 or complete nuke the drive and install fresh, I haven't seen it be a default setting.
I just shop at AliExpress instead of Amazon. All the same exact stuff, but typically half to a tenth of the cost. I just have to settle with longer shipping times, which is fine, if I need something now-now, I can just go buy it locally.
That's how I already use reddit. I tried their mobile app and it was so garbage I just use it in browser in desktop mode to avoid the annoying "Reddit is better on mobile" lie that I had to click past every time. I really don't understand the difference and obsession of using old.reddit vs regular. As far as I can tell, it functions exactly the same only with a bit of UI uplift. As for adblock, the modern internet is virtually unusable without it. I don't care about how much it hurts webhosts, ads are intrusive, obnoxious, sometimes/often a security risk, and I'm never-ever-ever-ever going to click on one anyway.
The two hour rule isn't solid. I've returned a game after completing a 1 hour tutorial of the game, only to get into the main game and find out it was nothing like the tutorial lead me to believe the game was. I had to AFK during the middle of playing, so I ended up with 5 hours of gameplay. I just told them what happened, said why I wanted to refund it, and I still got it refunded. It took five hours of the game running for me to determine that I just didn't like nor enjoy it.
but they're not reliable about this either. i had a similar experience once with an RTS and i asked for a refund at the 4-5 hour mark and was told no dice.
I point cameras at their houses, at their doors & driveways from my property. Why? Because they can't install a camera on my house, but I can. Nobody has a problem. There's no distrust. There's cameras pointed right back at my home, too. We watch each other, because having more than one camera point of view creates a better security for all of us. I also have them watching at my door, specifically so I can see who is at the door, when mail gets delivered, or when packages get dropped off.
None of us have the delusion that we're all spying on each other. We're watching out for each other.