And the subjectivity is bidirectional.

People judge models on their outputs, but how you like to prompt has a tremendous impact on those outputs and explains why people have wildly different experiences with the same model.

Home button issues were one of the most common hardware problems on iPhones <7. The haptic button evaporated an entire class of critical failures, hardly a blunder.

Games Workshop store employees will also kick you out for using 3d printed models in your army, even when it's just for casual play.

That's... insane

Bartenders will also kick you out if you bring your own booze to a bar.

I take that to mean "we won't let the AI refuse to pay them or otherwise break employment law" not that they could never be fired.

I read that as "it's not worth the negative PR of being associated with AI firing minimum wage employees" compared to just paying them for a year or two.

This is not net neutrality, all network traffic is not treated equally.

Ofcom seems to have invented their own definition of net neutrality and placed it on that website, but calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg. This is tiered access.

It doesn't meet a perfect theoretical definition of net neutrality, but it's a set of defined legal limits on the extent to which providers can treat different kinds of traffic differently.

Net neutrality is not theoretical, it is literally the default setting.

Any deviation from that default requires special effort be taken to identify network traffic and treat it differently, and as soon as you have made that effort you cannot truthfully claim to have net neutrality. The UK does not prohibit net neutrality but it does not require it either (according to the comment I replied to which I have not verified).

I guess to me this seems a bit like saying that free markets are the default setting. We’re not in some kind of perfect state of nature. We’re in a complex interconnected society where virtually everything of any importance is regulated to some extent. What you’re saying seems like saying “as soon as you impose one regulation you no longer have a free market”.

This non sequitur strains my ability to assume good faith on your part. We're not talking about markets, we're talking about a utility.

Does your water company bill you differently depending on what you use the water for? Your gas company? Electric? This is not a complicated concept to understand, please make an effort.

It’s just an analogy. I can understand if you don’t think the analogy lands, but it hardly seems grounds for doubting good faith.

And err, yes, not everyone is billed for water or electricity on the same terms as private homes.

>This is not a complicated concept to understand, please make an effort.

You could leave this out? It’s not the most effective way to bring people round to your point of view.

What would be the model of a country with stronger net neutrality laws? I think EU regulations are now a touch stronger than UK regulations due to post-Brexit divergence, but by world standards, the UK has strong net neutrality protections.

Legally speaking that's for entertainment purposes only

You have to add the final "]" or "}" yourself but json strings are free!

h264 is (generously) about 2x as efficient as MPEG-2, granted, but you're smearing those 5mbps across 6x as many pixels.

I would take crisp 480p over a gooey, artifact-softened 1080p for most content.

The only reason I haven't canceled my Plex is because I bought a lifetime pass a decade ago so I literally can't. :/ I almost wish I hadn't specifically so I could cancel it and send that signal.

But yes Plex is quite enshittified now. Would definitely start with Jellyfin or something else these days.

I'd happily sacrifice some pixels to avoid the aggressive DNR and hack 16:9 crop treatments typical of streaming re-releases.

The average person probably only knows the formulas for olivine and one or two feldspars.

And quartz of course!

(Reference for those wondering: https://xkcd.com/2501/)