It’s not at all like that, because guns and knives are different and give different results. You can buy any number of “spycam” glasses online whenever you want.
Laws already exist around using them in private settings. They also exist around using them in public settings too - you have no expectation of privacy in public, because you’re in public. You can’t stop someone taking your photo while you’re walking down the street.
But as we see with drive assistants, the person in the drivers seat (or the registered owner of the car) is responsible.
The person that asked it to do something and gave it permission to do it.
Why would the person who provides the platform be judged as controlling the users actions? When has that ever been true?
But in that analogy, the knife routinely asks you to confirm if you want to fire bullets or not.
AI does nothing without people telling it what to do, and giving it permission to do it.
Things don’t need to solve problems to be amazing and revolutionary.
I’m assuming you think the watermarks are just some hidden characters or something that you can see or remove by pasting into notepad?
What?
I’m just saying that Apple TVs are already a simple app launcher interface with basically nothing else.
The shield tv is still by far the best Android box in the market. It’s insane how it’s still supported by Nvidia, and still better than anything else out there.
The Apple TV is “decluttered” by default.
Replying to @sanitation@lemmy.today
“Top economist”? Sounds like that title is self given, as this is essentially how every single startup works, until long after they’re startups. Companies like Spotify and Netflix and every other big tech company worked exactly the same.
They’re all kept alive by investors until they’ve grown to a size where they can sustain themselves. Every dollar they earn from customers is re-invested back in the company until then, and they rely on investor funding.
Read the article. No, you don’t count.
The article says the opposite of what you are saying.
Replying to @HubertManne@piefed.social
Usually I’d agree, but the article and Google specifically got in front of this - they only counted people who opened the Gemini app, used the Gemini web interface, or Gemini live. They didn’t count people who simply used a google product that has Gemini in it.
Genuinely impressive numbers taking that into account. Had no idea it was popular.
Edit: has Gemini replaced the Google assistant shortcuts on all Android phones? If so, this is less impressive.
There are legal frameworks around reporting of data breaches in most countries. They didn’t do this out of the goodness of their hearts.
The people who use it to do things, obviously. Just like how cameras aren’t responsible for the photos that are taken with them, photoshop isn’t responsible for the images made with it, and knives aren’t responsible for the things that they cut, AI isn’t responsible for the stuff it outputs - the person controlling it is.
Congratulations, you just made a copy of Apple TVOS, on much worse hardware.
Love them or hate them, the Apple TV is the best streaming box around. I’ve got One and a shield tv, and the Apple TVs level of polish and performance is on a whole other level.
Replying to @AvocadoSandwich@eviltoast.org
You can’t see any other reason why having a heads-up-display on your vision, with AI being able to recognise every single thing in its vision? None at all?
Even the biggest haters of the technology can surely not be that blinded. Here’s an example for you - real time text and audio language translation, from any language to any language.
You now can see another reason :)
I don’t think it is an overstatement. It could mean full AR the world over. In every shop you could look at something and have a pop up with its price, allergy information, materials, place of manufacturing.
At every sporting event you could have your own personal replays and multiple camera angles.
While cooking you could have instructions showing you exactly where to cut, how long to pour, when and how to stir, timers for multiple bits of your cooking, see the temperature of something by looking at it.
While repairing a car engine you could have every part being labelled for you, with detailed instructions on every single step of everything from changing the oil to rebuilding an engine.
While driving you could see the speed of other cars, be alerted to potential hazards, see directions from your point of view.
The limit really is the sky for AR, which is what the end goal is for smart glasses. That’s the unfathomable usefulness of the technology.
The chance of a hidden camera existing is near 0%
You can’t genuinely believe this, can you? If a person is a creep who wants to record people in private situations without their consent, there’s a much higher than 0% chance.
Yeh I know, so clearly that way of doing it isn’t sufficient.