Skip to content

Taco Bell rethinks AI drive-through after man orders 18,000 waters

Technology
216 126 531
  • 68 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    48 Aufrufe
    S
    So like runescape?
  • 49 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    P
    I'm sure they're not including Russia, Israel or Saudi Arabia, though.
  • 34 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    76 Aufrufe
    O
    She didn’t call herself a libertarian and explicitly said she isn’t And North Korea calls its self democratic. Yet we don't call it a democracy. No, we define these categories by what they are/do/believe in/etc... and like it or not, Ayn Rand's Objectivism is 100% a component of libertarian ideology, Ayn Rand's beliefs are very much a core component of Libertarianism, and i'm sorry to inform you that many on that list of yours ARE libertarians, such as Milei. In the same way the Marx&Hegel were a cornerstone of communism. But you are correct about Zelenskyy, he is not libertarian. Bullshit. You might also want to think who’s “we” and what externalia does giving that “we” an ability to “put limits on these things” possess. Standard Libertarian response that basically ignores the existence of anything outside the individual Also, from the person who you believe isn't a Libertarian: The source of the government's authority is "the consent of the governed." This means that the government is not the ruler, but the servant or agent of the citizens; it means that the government as such has no rights except the rights delegated to it by the citizens for a specific purpose. -Ayn Rand, Galt's Speech. A government is large scale organized violence and warlords. Spoken just like Rand herself! "Only a government holds that power. The nature of governmental action is: coercive action. The nature of political power is: the power to force obedience under threat of physical injury—the threat of property expropriation, imprisonment, or death." The Virtue of Selfishness "The Nature of Government," The Virtue of Selfishness, again Ayn Rand. Lastly, on privatization: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Fjep.20.3.187
  • Itch.io has begun restoring NSFW content, but only if it’s free

    Technology technology
    34
    312 Stimmen
    34 Beiträge
    168 Aufrufe
    A
    The problem cited by payment processor is dodged if the money is coming in as donations rather than payments, no?
  • UK government seeks way out of clash with US over Apple encryption

    Technology technology
    1
    19 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Video game actors' strike officially ends after AI deal

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    121 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    145 Aufrufe
    paraphrand@lemmy.worldP
    huh, interesting! It’s The Mythical Man-Month! That book was published back in 1975. They definitely know better, but must be in quite a pickle.
  • 71 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    83 Aufrufe
    adespoton@lemmy.caA
    Most major content producers have agreements with YouTube such that as their content is discovered, monetization all goes to the rights holders. In general, this seems like a pretty good idea, and better than copyright maximalism. However, I’ve had original works of my own “monetized by rights holder” because they used my work (with permission) in one of their products, and so now have co-opted all expressions of my work on YouTube. So the system isn’t perfect.
  • Uber, Lyft oppose some bills that aim to prevent assaults during rides

    Technology technology
    12
    94 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    141 Aufrufe
    F
    California is not Colorado nor is it federal No shit, did you even read my comment? Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate. People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No. Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”. Here’s just one little but relevant section: Before a person is permitted to act as a driver through use of a transportation network company's digital network, the person shall: Obtain a criminal history record check pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 40-10.1-110 as supplemented by the commission's rules promulgated under section 40-10.1-110 or through a privately administered national criminal history record check, including the national sex offender database; and If a privately administered national criminal history record check is used, provide a copy of the criminal history record check to the transportation network company. A driver shall obtain a criminal history record check in accordance with subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) every five years while serving as a driver. A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: (c) (I) A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: An offense involving fraud, as described in article 5 of title 18, C.R.S.; An offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S.; An offense against property, as described in article 4 of title 18, C.R.S.; or A crime of violence, as described in section 18-1.3-406, C.R.S. A person who has been convicted of a comparable offense to the offenses listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (c) in another state or in the United States shall not serve as a driver. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the criminal history record check for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least five years after the criminal history record check was conducted. A person who has, within the immediately preceding five years, been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to a felony shall not serve as a driver. Before permitting an individual to act as a driver on its digital network, a transportation network company shall obtain and review a driving history research report for the individual. An individual with the following moving violations shall not serve as a driver: More than three moving violations in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver; or A major moving violation in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver, whether committed in this state, another state, or the United States, including vehicular eluding, as described in section 18-9-116.5, C.R.S., reckless driving, as described in section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., and driving under restraint, as described in section 42-2-138, C.R.S. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the driving history research report for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least three years. So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.