What I find crazier is the next sentence:
You can decline the recording by informing the healthcare professional treating you at the beginning of the appointment. The recording will be deleted immediately once the functionality has generated a proposed patient record entry [own emphasis].
The way I read it, you can’t even prevent the AI from listening in, you can have the recorded conversation deleted, but only after the AI has processed it.
It seems to me the main point from that post was the text above (which was not from an LLM AFAICT), which I do think is in the spirit of the com since it is a response to criticism of spaces like this.
I’m sort of surprised there’s no conscious effort to counter that. In other areas where automation has taken over they will ensure that people can still do the work manually. I visited an automated metro system a while ago, and they explained that even though certain lines are GoA 4 (in other words so highly automated they don’t need staff on board anymore), they still have people operating the trains manually every once in a while, specifically so that they don’t forget how to do it if need be, and that the new recruits can learn as well.
That’s beside the point. The point is that it took Apple that fucking long to implement it, and Apple users will start acting as if it’s something new, even though it’s absolutely not.
Let’s set some things straight, opinions aside.
Capitalism is simply the concept of production being run privately, with supply and demand regulating the market.
Productivity is a measure of how much is created with a specific amount of input. As long as the technology moves forward, productivity usually increases as well. If a new technology allows 9 people to do what was previously the work of 10, you’ve increased productivity in that sector.
Inflation is the increase of prices. Ideally, it’s supposed to broadly reflect the increase of productivity. A small amount of inflation (usually around 2%/year) acts as an investment incentive, since hoarding money makes you effectively slowly lose it, because it loses its value over time, so instead you’re coaxed into investing it into companies/whatever whose value at least keep up with inflation. If you invest well, the value of whatever you invest it in grows larger than inflation, in which case you’ve increased the value of what you’ve invested. If you invest poorly, the value increases less than the rate of inflation, or even decreases, in both cases you’ve lost value.
A company that doesn’t grow or shrink from a production perspective generally will keep up with inflation. An economy is generally measured with the GDP (Gross Domestic Product, a measure of how much is produced, valued in a currency), and similarly, since it’s also measured in currency, if the economy grows at the rate of inflation and there’s no productivity gain, the amount produced will stay the same.
Emissions don’t have to be coupled with growth. A growing economy that progressively switches to renewables at a fast enough pace can still grow while reducing emissions. In fact, the primary reason why emissions keep rising despite capitalism generally dealing with issue of limited resources is that emissions generally aren’t counted as resources, since there are no or not enough costs associated with them (read: externalization of costs). This is the reason why economists repeatedly tout carbon pricing as one of the most effective methods of carbon emission reductions. If companies are forced to factor in emissions costs the way they do every other resource (like working hours, materials, etc.), they will be much more incentivized to do so, since it directly affects their bottom line. Progressively increasing carbon costs could very well lead to the near elimination of carbon emissions. Carbon pricing, however, has not been anywhere rigorous enough to lead to this outcome.
Now that we’ve gotten some facts straight, let the discussion continue.
Google Ireland, which runs Google Search in the EU, now faces a fine of up to €250,000 for each breach, or detention of its managers, if it repeats three versions of the text. [own emphasis]
Holy shit that judge isn’t fucking around.
Live is life. Na Naa na na na!
So… The tail is the lever of a diarrhea dispenser?
This happens in Canada as well. The way I see it is it’s supposed to show support for the candidate in question.
How about this: it’s awful in both places. Just because another country started doing it as well doesn’t excuse anything, it means they’re now both doing something unacceptable.
Yes, to be fair it was, at least practically. It was one of these government owned companies - so that they’re still expected to work kind of as a private company. So sort of an in between thing.