MrNeon

>and yet we can still look at it and say "yeah that was CGI".

All of it?

It doesn't lack those voiced lines because of some purposeful artistic goal.

>"privately" was off which is why it says "more privately" now

The actually significant change is the addition of "This won’t change how data is collected by websites you visit and the services they use, including Google."

Which was obvious to anyone with basic tech knowledge already.

>Because it's the same company that was promising the privacy.

But WHICH privacy? It never promised that websites won't know who you are, you can still login into websites, you're still in the same IP. Should it automatically disable all cookies and route you through seven proxies so you can be truly "private"?

"Now you can browse privately, and other people who use this device won’t see your activity. However, downloads and bookmarks will be saved."

Can you tell me how the original Incognito mode disclaimer was misleading?

Even if it is detectable it shouldn't be detected, why would I want websites to act differently when I'm in private mode?

And if it did block Google's services from capturing the same data as they capture in non-private mode it would act as a sort of ad blocker, why should that be a function of private mode?

What Google was "caught" doing was exactly what it was doing in non-incognito mode already. Anyone expecting the websites you visit to know you're in private mode and to not log data is just lacking basic tech knowledge.

It is silly that Google had to explicitly state that in the disclaimer.

I'm curious, what would you personally consider to be a step too far in the fight against CSAM?

How Could You Possibly Be Against This?!?!? Regulation

I use Firefox with uBlock and besides a couple of times where video start was delayed by a few seconds it has been working as well as before.

Section breaks keep the formatting changes from affecting the previous/following content so you can place and format images as you wish.

I've seen that sentiment on reddit as well and I can't phantom how you think it being on purpose is more likely than a mistake when

1 - The error is so blatantly large

2 - There is a graph without error right next to it

3 - The errors are not there in the system card and the presentation page

Sure but "Also the the sora videos are proven to be modified ads" is demonstrably false, for the demos OpenAI shared and the artist made ones.

Oh, so not the actual demo videos OpenAI shared on their website and twitter.

> Also the the sora videos are proven to be modified ads

Can't find anything about that, you got a link?

MJ coomers? The same MJ that bans accounts for coomer content?

Not sure that will change just because of a new frontend.

> What is ultimately going to be undefeated is training your own model.

From scratch?