Must have been a tiny or very new school, or they were around and you just didn’t hear about them. They aren’t a big deal in Canada, generally speaking; at my school, I only ever find out about one because a friend of mine had lots of friends in the fraternity. This was at a mid-size school that’s less than 60 years old, iirc.
Maybe, but I think it’s more that his only negotiation tactic is to threaten to do something drastic, like cancelling “the deal” (or military attack), then wait for weakness/capitulation to push for more concessions. Over and over again.
The article never makes it clear what these numbers mean; presumably, they’re looking at bookings for future dates, but are they comparing those rates to future bookings at the same time as last year, or actual hotel occupancy on the date?
As someone without any knowledge of the industry, I learned basically nothing from this article, since it’s completely opaque.
For example:
For instance, occupancy in Vancouver for June 18, the day of the Canada-Qatar match, was 50.3 per cent, down by about a third from 73.8 per cent last year.
This is a poorly researched article, imho.
I’m skeptical that this will be any better than the bullshit we’ve seen in other jurisdictions, thanks to $millions of Meta lobbyists, but a ban isn’t the problem, it’s age verification that’s a problem.
A ban is a great idea, with absolutely no consequences for youth and no age verification. But rest circumvention doesn’t mean a ban is useless.
A ban could make it illegal for businesses to target youth under 16 for social media, ban schools from allowing social media to communicate with students (like is currently the norm for many school-sanctioned clubs and sports teams), and we could use illegal use by children as an avenue to educate parents about the harms of social media.
My guess is that Canada is about to get a terrible written-by-Meta bill announced tomorrow, but there’s a chance it could be a reasonable law. (I won’t hold my breath.)
I appreciate you taking the time to respond so thoroughly. I don’t have as much time to respond right now, unfortunately. So, in short
I agree those are generally left-leaning. They are an NDP party moreso than the Alberta NDP, but I would hardly consider them to be far/hard left. Like, a tiny marginal tax increase on the wealthy is barely left leaning, compared to what would be equitable.
But agreed, generally, that there’s a lot of managerial bloat. I see it at all levels, but especially healthcare and education; why do tiny districts need so many superintendents/assistants and directors? Hospitals have so many layers of managers. Etc.
The BC NDP are very centrist, not left leaning. Like, old growth logging is still continuing and taxes aren’t going up on the wealthy/businesses.
Why do you think they’re “very left”? I can’t think of any strong examples to support that stance, but I admit I don’t pay super close attention to everything they do, so I’m open to hearing your evidence.
That’s WW1, bro.
Canada declared war in WW2 a week (to the day, iirc) after the UK. It was a deliberate political move by King, particularly due to the legacy of the Conservatives forcing conscription on Quebec after running on “no conscription” as a policy platform, permanently damaging the Cons electability in Quebec. By putting the view to parliament, and not whipping the Liberals to view fire declaring war, insulated the Liberals from political backlash from Quebec and asserted Canada’s independence as a nation (which plays well in Quebec, in particular, ironically.)
I’ve been sitting this from the rooftops, but nobody seems to be listening. LLMs do not create enough value to justify their cost, and their costs rise exponentially for small, incremental gains. It’s a money pit.
Worse, it’s a massive sunk cost masquerading as investment. Inflated equity validations are propped up by an illusion. I know that timing a crash is impossible, but I literally don’t understand how anyone paying attention doesn’t see what’s coming.
It’s going to be bad. 80% such market declines aren’t atypical, historically.
And this isn’t even touching on the Republican dismantling of the American government apparatus and spending billions in a war to disrupt global supply chains of critical resources.
It’s going to be really bad.
Except that it’ll never work out that way. Open models are almost as good and cost a tiny fraction of the cost of the proprietary models. There are no moats to protect their business model. Anyone can come along and eat their lunch.
AI has no path to profitability since it’s going to be commoditized. There isn’t a big enough difference between individual models to justify the price premium of paying $100/million tokens when open models cost 10¢/million tokens.
And it gets even worse when you consider specialized models; the real future is likely going to be custom training models for specific use cases, trained on the company’s data (and other data too, of course). A much smaller model can be much more successful on tasks it has been trained on. It’ll cost a tiny fraction of the compute of a mega model to train and likely beat mega models on tasks within its training domain. And it can run entirely on the company intranet, so there are no real privacy/security concerns.
Right now, the big players are giving away their compute at cents on the dollar, so there’s not much incentive to run local models. As soon as they start to push pricing to try to become profitable, companies will switch to in-house models.
OpenAI is doomed. I doubt they’ll be relevant in a decade.
The Mozilla numbers are wildly inflated. They were effectively just advertising for Anthropic’s mediocre LLM with that blog post.
Exactly my thoughts, too. QR codes are a great tool, but also an incredibly valuable and opaque vector for scams.
The was one recently where they put scam QR stickers over parking payment signs, so users gave their credit card details to scammers. How are you supposed to catch that, as the end user? It’s not like you know the URL you’re supposed to be going to.
Normalizing scanning QR codes just to access a website is going to be abused by scammers in no time.
True that there’s no way to enforce watermarks, but it could be required to mandate that paid AI models include an invisible binary watermark in the last digit of the, say, red colour channel, so odd bits form something like a repeating QR code relative to the even bits; require the fans in keyframes in AI produced video, too.
It wouldn’t work for text, obv, and this would be trivially easy to strip in post-processing, but it’s technically and legally possible, with low cost. Of course it wouldn’t affect local models, but not many people are running good image/video genAI locally anyway.
Radical inclusion was well intentioned, but it was terrible for so many students who need reduced demands and extra supports.
But radical inclusion has staying power; it lets politicians virtue signal that they’re “being inclusive” while cutting costs and services. (And failing to meet their obligations to provide public education to every child.)
No offense intended, but your comment is intensely ironic, and how common the mindset is that an autistic child is “misbehaving” is exactly the problem.
The author’s children are routinely becoming dysregulated and are then no longer in control of their actions. That’s how “red zone” dysregulating is expressed. The child is a child and is not responsible for their dysregulation and resulting behavior.
There are many possible solutions, but they are all upstream from the behaviour. “Behaviour is the symptom, not the problem” (Dr. Becky Kennedy).
These children need support with dysregulating triggers: well-trained and present adults need to help identifying triggering stimulus. Sensory? Demands? Bodily needs? Emotional needs? Transitions? Then accommodations need to be made to keep triggers within the child’s ability to regulate.
These children need support with co-regulation. A well regulated child can handle dysregulating triggers. When the child will be exposed to a dysregulating trigger that’s known in advance, like a transition or fire drill, then co-regulate ahead of time. And coregulation needs to be practiced, over and over again. It will take thousands of times co-regulating before they are able to self-regulate.
These children need support with demands. As with all children, demands must be reasonable for their current abilities. This is as true for academics as for “life skills”. And, as with all children, when they are becoming dysregulated, demands need to be decreased, but often they are increased instead (asking them questions, telling them to do something, etc.)
In the words of Dr. Ross Greene, “if you’re intervening after the behaviour, you’re late.” Focusing on “misbehaviour” misses the point completely.
All children have a right to education, and many many autistic children in Canada are being denied access to education by a system that is systematically failing them.
Jesus Christ, what the hell did I just read? I didn’t clue in to RT until I saw the comments, but that leaves me even more confused—it didn’t even try to pretend to be a news article. It’s blatant propaganda. I thought RT was supposed to be, well, competent at producing propaganda.
The average cost per square foot of a new condo was $1,189 in the first quarter compared with an average resale price of $859, a 38 per cent difference.
Seems like a weird way to frame that number. Sure, 1189/859 is 1.38, but that’s the percentage resale prices would need to rise to match new unit build costs. The way it’s framed sounds like they mean 859/1189 (“prices of resales are lower than the costs of new builds by x%”), which is .72, a 28% difference.
Math nerd alert.
Seriously, though, I would expect better from a financial news publication. AI slop, I’m guessing. (Edit: not the whole article, mind, I just mean that number framing and/or calculation looks, to me, like a typical AI error. The rest of the article is well written, imho.)
When I received the first email from my “headhunter”, I was drawn in by how professional and customised it seemed. The writing was of a good standard and the sender was clearly familiar with my profile. It felt personal. Even five years ago, says Rosser, you could often spot a scam just by looking at the grammar. “But they’re so clever now.”
“The growing accessibility of AI means that criminals have way more leverage than they ever did before,” Webb says. “They can produce these scams much faster. They can make them more relevant, and there’s a much higher level of sophistication.”
This was the most interesting part, to me.
In the past, scammers deliberately made their pitches obvious, so only “suckers” would fall for them. With AI, it’s now scalable to make the whole thing targeted enough to be believable.
And that’s truly scary.
I skimmed most of this thread and didn’t see anyone mention that Steam actually supports third party stores. They let developers sell game keys on other storefronts for free (with limits, granted—the number of keys they can generate depends on sales on Steam, I think.)
Fanatical and Humble only exist because Steam handles all of the games delivery infrastructure for them. That’s, like, the opposite of monopolistic behaviour. Name another tech monopoly giving their services away for free so other directly competing businesses can profit.
I keep forgetting how useless Epic is.
Every once in a while, I want to scan my Epic library to see what’s there… and it doesn’t even seem to have a library feature? I need to use a separate app just to see all my games on their storefront.
Then, occasionally, I’ll want to check out what people are saying about their free game offers… and they don’t have reviews?
They don’t support Linux.
Their Android app keeps redirecting to their website for basic functionality.
Do they even have a method for devs to show patch notes or game updates? I haven’t seen any.
I mean, great that they’re giving developers a bigger cut, I guess, but 88% of nothing is worse than 70% of actual sales. Why would I, as a customer, ever try to shop there? It’s a terrible UX missing many features I have grown to expect.
So, yeah. The author of this article gets it.
Edit: and why bother listing your game there, either? Another storefront to manage is a decent amount of overhead work, I’d expect. You’d need pretty good sales for the effort to pay off.
Yeah, that was the same at my uni. Literally the only way I heard about it was through friends of my friend, in like 3rd year. Not a big thing for sure!
Except at Western, but friends don’t let friends go to Western.