You know your dogs' breeds were susceptible to enjoying fetch so you never played fetch with them. Ah yes those poor idiots who actually work their dogs for their bred purpose.
They get to retrieve things but not constantly like I often see people doing. Eg throw ball with wanger [0], dog gets ball, person throws ball again ad infinitum. The constant thing is the key, we don’t let an unhealthy obsession develop is the point I'm making which looking back on my comment is pretty obvious.
Spaniels are all rounders in terms of their working - they’re as happy to flush, work ground or retrieve. 2/3 (and have done some light work) of ours are reasonably well trained but as mentioned they’re normally happier having a good sniff than picking up a tennis ball.
Probably living in the countryside that’s more interesting than chasing a plastic ball about all day.
On the topic of ad-infinitum ball throwing there are literally people automating this task [1] which I think is pretty terrible.
Yes, the title is editorialized and there's nothing inherently wrong with what was shared. But I do think this reflects poorly on OpenAI. They seem proud of how well Sora can create deepfakes, and share no real perspective or concern for the ethical dilemma and impact these models are already having. The marketing around Sora seems incredibly juvenile.
Maybe it's because my server is still on v.1.139.4, but I have had the opposite experience with the new beta timeline on Android. I disabled it after trying it for a week because it took so long for thumbnails to load vs. the stable version. Compared to Google Photos, any version of the Immich timeline I've tried feels extremely clunky. It's a great backup alternative and I commend the team behind it, but it is far from being a product I'd recommend as an everyday photo gallery app.
We had no part in this. The blame lies squarely with Google and its employees, who trade away user freedom for profit and career gain. Many who are smart enough to know better but instead compromise their principles. It's just another symptom of late-stage capitalism.
Profit is driven by demand. It incentivizes meeting demand. Profit is not what is scarce. It's our ability to meet everyone's demand. In a reality where profit does not exist, rare disorders are still at the bottom of the list, because demand and net impact is still low.
This has GPT written all over it: "That’s not just a runtime bug. That’s a reliability risk baked into the ecosystem."
For whatever reason, it constantly uses rhetorical reclassification like “That’s not just X. That’s Y.” when it's trying to make a point.
In GPT's own words:
```
### Why GPT uses it so often:
- It sounds insightful and persuasive with minimal complexity.
- It gives an impression of depth by moving from the obvious to the interpretive.
- It matches common patterns in blog posts, opinion writing, and analyst reports.
```
I think that last point is probably the most important.
These “ATM”'s exist to facilitate scamming people; the most charitable I'm willing to be towards the provider is that they know they're engaging in providing a very high-risk service and need to be prepared to eat the costs of fraud if they can't reverse transactions, just like any other provider of high-risk financial services.
The crime that was perpetrated on the family that ATM owner knowingly or unknowingly facilitated.
Your inability to reverse transactions implies you're taking on a very high risk and should be vetting your customers very carefully. “But defi!” is not an excuse when you know that these ATM's are used for this purpose.
Okay, but the ATM is not complicit in the crime. To blame the ATM would be like blaming the bank for allowing the sale of a car that facilitated a heist.
The correct analogy is if a bank is used to facilitate wire fraud, and they absolutely do have to reverse fraudulent payments, even if they're just a middle-man that unknowingly facilitated the fraud, even if they did their due diligence.
“But crypto!” is irrelevant; don't engage in providing high-risk services without looking into what the risks actually are and who is legally responsible for absorbing them.
Gift cards are much more commonly used for scams, because your grandma knows how to buy gift cards. The difference is that gift cards are very profitable to big chain stores, whereas cryptocurrency presents a threat to the status quo. Police in the USA also get to keep any unaccounted for cash or crypto they find in a search, so there's an added incentive to target the ATM.
Does western union reverse transactions? To my knowledge, they do not. Yes they co-operate with police, but so do licensed bitcoin ATM operators.
Also "defi" is just ponzi schemes. The only real use for crypto has been using it as money. People buy recreational drugs, yes. They also buy medicine, data privacy services, or donate to political causes that their government makes it risky to associate with. Depending on the coin it has the valued properties of being permissionless (can't be debanked), stable (USD-tether compared to local tin-pot currency), anonymous (monero). You may be lucky enough to have access to lots of stable currency which you can keep in a reliable bank account in a country that lets you buy everything you need, but don't make the mistake of believing that's the case for everybody.
It makes a lot of sense to seek ways to stop the scams. Distrust is expensive in a society. Targeting the money changers is certainly an idea, we'll see if it works. I predict nothing will change until the people who are running the fraud operations actually go to prison.
“What is this case about?
For years, many people who lost money to scams sent their payment through a Western Union wire transfer. Scammers contacted people and promised prizes, loans, jobs, discounted products or other financial rewards in exchange for money upfront. They also pretended to be family members in need of cash, or law enforcement officers demanding payment. The scammers told people to send money through Western Union. No one received the cash, prizes or services they were promised.
Because of joint investigations by the FTC, the Justice Department, and the U. S. Postal Inspection Service, Western Union agreed to pay $586 million and admitted to aiding and abetting wire fraud. The Justice Department is now using that money to provide refunds to people who were tricked into using Western Union to pay scammers.”
“In its agreement with the Justice Department, Western Union admits to criminal violations including willfully failing to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and aiding and abetting wire fraud.”
Bitcoin ATMs are supposed to be more of a currency exchange business, but I can see how a lot of people would treat them as a money transmitter business.
Bitcoin and similar were created in part as a workaround for these regulations, it appealed to people who wanted control of their own money. People who wanted an end to chargeback fraud, and credit card fraud. I wonder which sort of system has the lowest total fraud costs, including costs of preventative and compliance measures. Do you think we have enough data to make that sort of estimation?
It's ultimately a have your cake or eat it scenario. Regulated bitcoin will look a lot like the system that unregulated bitcoin was meant to be an alternative to.
Based on your argument, crypto exchanges would similarly be engaging in crime, but in reality they aren't. In the same way, there is no evidence of any crime here except for the robbery performed by Texas.
