FriendOfDeSoto

I could imagine a deranged billionaire, like imagine a son of emerald miners who used his inherited wealth to buy EV or space companies, somebody who is quite short and self conscious about it, with a small penis feeling he needs to have children in triple figures before he flies to Mars. Anyways, a filthy rich guy like that who has everything and now wants a memento of Napoleon. He'll keep it in a secret basement and that's where he will go to masturbate looking at it.

It seems weirdly specific but I'm really just making it up.

I think this will stay in somebody's basement. Even if you took it apart, experts will be able to recognize parts of the jewelry even if they chopped it up, say, the gemstones that were part of it. There are probably easier ways to get the same amount of valuable materials that won't raise as many eyebrows when you try to fence them. So either these thieves are learning that lesson right now or a mad billionaire is masturbating next to it in his basement.

I would say for 3 out of 5 recipes extending the time will probably work but you'll need to eyeball and needle/poke it. But if the recipe relies on the baked good to form a crust at this higher temperature, the result will probably not be as good. That's more crucial with bread. Test it before you invite people over.

Seek professional help before somebody dies.

It's not perfect training data. Being encouraged to add alt text and actually doing it are two different things. Writing good alt text is another matter all together. And anything that's on the internet is training data whether people want it to be or not. The only difference is ethical whether the scraper accepts and respects a version of robots dot txt, i.e. "do not scrape," that communicates the training data's holders' intentions. And if they torrent books you can guess how respectful they are.

Maybe the NYT's headline writers' eyes weren't that great to begin with?

The tech could represent the end of visual fact — the idea that video could serve as an objective record of reality — as we know it.

We already declared that with the advent of photoshop. I don't want to downplay the possibility of serious harm being a result of misinformation carried through this medium. People can be dumb. I do want to say the sky isn't falling. As the slop tsunami hits us we are not required to stand still, throw our hands in the air, and take it. We will develop tools and sensibilities that will help us not to get duped by model mud. We will find ways and institutions to sieve for the nuggets of human content. Not all at once but we will get there.

This is fear mongering masquerading as balanced reporting. And it doesn't even touch on the precarious financial situations the whole so-called AI bubble economy is in.

In summary: you have the cooperation of the parents, you cannot exclude the existence of a mental issues, and you are allowed to spray the item then. These are conditions I put ahead of any other suggestion.

YT and TT are platforms that breed weird quirk uniformity. They all grab your attention with the same phrases ("you'll never believe ...", "what about [insert something outrageous]? Let me explain ..." etc.) For a while, everybody had the same Ikea shelves behind them crammed with shit. Then I think we moved on to neon signs. It used to be fashionable to show off your expensive big microphone, probably much to the delight of its manufacturer. And that's why I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the manufacturer paid some influencers to hold the tiny mike prominently in the shot like they would hold a dog poop bag filled with poop from a stranger's dog. And then it was copied.

I'm not talking about models. That in itself is not a YouTube competitor.

I'm not aware if they have announced a platform for this type of video. OpenAI and Meta have and that's what I meant.

I fear this will be an uphill battle for YT. I have this gut feeling that Meta and OpenAI here are employing the flooding the zone strategy to hurt and maybe displace YT. The sheer flood of slop with the occasional enjoyable nugget of content flooding YT from the pAIrates will be harder to filter out, clog up servers, and users like you and I will get annoyed and gradually consume less content. YT loses market share and some new platform can move in for the kill, operated by Meta, OpenAI and/or other such reputable companies. It's not easy to monetize this crap, which is a loss leader at this point. It doesn't look to me like enough people will subscribe to these services to be financially viable. They have to find other ways. So pivot to video 2.0 - this time with so-called AI! Sigh.

You are making assumptions here. Twenty-something year olds are allowed to date anyone older they like, the only restrictions that apply go the other way age-wise. And dating older people doesn't automatically lead to self-destruction. So what's your point?

You have to phrase it as a question to get the money. When you buzz in you get something odd like 7 seconds to answer the question. If you just say "Eiffel Tower" then Ken Jennings will now probably just stare at you expectingly to rephrase your reply in that time. I think in the past Alex Trebek may have prompted candidates to rephrase their non-question answers but I haven't seen that happening in a while (but I don't watch it that regularly either so 🧂).

The whole point of the show is that the standard quiz show mechanic question->answer gets put on its head. The clue on the wall is the answer and the candidates have to provide a question it answers.