clort

I don't know about the USA, but it seems that generally filming in public where you catch sight of passerbys and filming a specific person in public spaces are wildly different things.

If I stand outside your house and follow you all day recording your every moment in a public space, is that legal or has that turned into harassment? Certainly in many countries, filming an incidental person may be legal but filming them in detail and from every angle is not (eg upskirting)

How about if you put that notice on the website, but also write it out explicitly and post it via registered mail to the Meta lawyers. Explicitly state that the content on your site is not licenced to be scraped for free and any usage must be paid for (eg $10/GET with penalties for non-payment), and that any usage of the site by Meta or their agents is an indication that they accept the terms fully.

Then check your logs and start sending appropriate invoices.

Then after 1yr of unpaid invoices: <profit>

Street Lighting. Sodium lamps used 250-500W and LEDs are 50-150W. Councils have been replacing the former with the latter ever since it was possible, as the savings were apparent after only a few years (and, the early investors could sell the old bulbs to authorities who did not have the funds to invest)

"If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" -- Isaac Newton

There may be a difference between the passport you are presenting, and your passport. Until the border agent determines that those are equivalent, you are not necessarily who you say you are.

Not just so that you don't lose it in case of an invasion, but it is proof that you would be willing to help out the host country in the case they were invaded. Also, that you would not invade them.

In the olden days, the local lords would marry their children together, to create familial groups and ensure that for the forseeable future the local areas would not have a conflict. Modern democracies don't have such valuable family members, we use valuable objects instead.

Interestingly, 59 tonnes of gold was sold in USA and bought in London. So that means perhaps "Somebody" transferred 59 tonnes of their gold holdings to the USA.. who was that?

This is similar to what the French did last year.

The other thing I noticed, is that as the article chose to mention:

> Gold that is held with the Bank of England must meet modern international trade standards

with implication being that the gold it previously held in the USA was not meeting those standards, but is that just journalistic fluff? what are those standards? (could be exact weights in g rather than purity?)

NB the Netherlands still has >200 tonnes of gold held in the USA & Canada.

the age is not the measure of quality. the GP said they left the posts/comments open. anybody can read that and check if they are or not a serious contributor

Could be, but unfortunately (3) can generate the code but it is not copyrightable (Thaler v. Perlmutter)

I think I've read the article differently to you. It does not say that the afterimage is a test. In fact it calls it an illusion.

> This afterimage illusion, while a product of perception, serves as a bridge to understanding visualization

The way that illusion works is simple. You expose your eye to green light without moving your gaze (stare at the dot). The green receptors in your eye become tired in the receptor pattern of the apple. Then, you switch to the white light which is broad spectrum. You fail to see the green, leaving red (blue is almost green, and our colour triangle is not equilateral). So, you see an afterimage of the apple but in red. This fades quickly as your green receptors recover from the overload. It has nothing to with aphantasia and the article does not claim it does.

maybe add it at the end also :)

I found that some of the timeline seemed out for my worldview. I'm not really sure how long the whole AI bubble has been out there, but it just seems so recent that I wasn't sure how they fitted all that in in the current timeline. Perhaps that will mature, in 5 years it won't all seem so new and perhaps more plausible.

To address the GPs point though, I do think that with LLM-assistance even now you can certainly create such sites pretty quickly with a low skill level, and that will only become easier. The big problem with creating things (in that way, or manually) is that you are the architect and artistic director, and in truth many people just don't have the ability to manage the end-result in a way that will work. We see this in websites created by developers for their own software which get posted here. Too many times there are massive assumptions that the viewer knows all about the software, which means it is almost incomprehensible to the incomer who may be interested but leaves before engaging (that is: me). I don't suppose that was a problem for Aarons bot society, but it could have affected the launch.

I recognise these scammers. I run a website for a small community group which just has a bit of information about them which has a contact us page with minimal protection. It comes in waves the language is very similar offering SEO and suchlike. I don't allow any of that through to the community because they are mostly non-technical and somebody will no doubt reply.

This scam spam has been arriving since I set the website up (2019 IIRC), well before LLMs became available. Now that I consider it, haven't seen any lately I guess they have a new target.. I'd better brace myself for a new AI generated onslaught.

I don't know about iOS but if it saves it to your Files and lets iOS deal with the synchronisation then it should not have any network permissions?

(I use KeePassDX from F-droid it does not have network permissions)