08:27 AM Good Morning, As many of you have experienced, the NYC Public Schools accounts are experiencing a citywide outage. They are working on fixing and we will keep you updated as we have more information. In the meantime, enjoy the snow!
People on the beaten path would also have had trouble this morning.
Today it is heavily snowing in Brooklyn and so instead of a Snow Day during which schools are closed, we're having a Remote School Day and this means having to join a Zoom meeting. However, the Zoom meeting the teacher created requires to sign in to Zoom. We tried signing in my kid with her personal Google account, but couldn't lie during the birth year prompt, and were denied the creation of a Zoom account because our kid isn't 13 yet. Tried to sign in with Apple, but were also denied as the Apple account apparently provides the owner's age directly without prompt.
At this point, I assume New York City Department of Education-issued Google accounts also have a provision for underage Zoom accounts to allow students to sign in teacher-led Zoom meetings, but I absolutely don't want to test this theory as it would be relinquishing the rights to use a computer we paid for with our own money to the NYCDOE once again.
We ended up using my partner's account to sign in Zoom and let me kid in, which isn't ideal, but sheesh.
PSA: If you missed the debunking, the recent story about the alleged Swiss DDoS attack using 3 million connected toothbrushes is funny but made up. #InternetOfThings#IoT
@Rasmus Fuhse It isn't a good example indeed, but it is one of the main current examples of how flawed the technology can be and still be released in commercial cars.
@Rasmus Fuhse This is a wonderful stance, but Tesla's responsibility avoidance behavior feels more indicative of the things to come if this tech ever gets more widespread, at least in the US where lawsuits are a national sport.
@Rasmus Fuhse Yes, but while it is easy to sue individual drivers in human-caused accidents, how do you deal with robot-caused accidents? Who’s responsible, the owner of the autonomous vehicle who may or may not be inside the vehicle at the time, who may be an individual or a company with a legal department able to stave off lawsuits? Or the car manufacturer who actually made the software but published an End User Licence Agreement that they aren’t liable for accidents?
Car insurance companies have a pretty good model of human behavior, but with robots, I’m assuming all bets are off, including for human drivers who may end up having the worst time establishing who should pay for the damage if they are a victim of robot road rage.
I believe autonomous vehicles should be on rails to ensure safety and linked together for increased efficiency. It turns out it already exists!
@Rasmus Fuhse Unfortunately, this is wishful thinking (that I used to have as well). Experience has since shown that for this to be even remotely true, road conditions need to be ideal and no pedestrians should be anywhere near the road, at the very least. Even then, we've all seen the videos where Tesla cars on autopilot violently swerve into incoming traffic for no discernable reason. Every time that I've seen it's at low speed in a quiet residential area and the driver is able to grab the steering wheel in time, but it just goes to show that in road safety, we just can't have a driving software that's only 99% accurate, or even 99.9% accurate, or even 99.99% accurate, because all mistakes are potentially fatal for pedestrians, the driver, their passenger, other drivers or their passengers.
@Rasmus Fuhse I used to believe that autonomous driving was great, but I don't believe this anymore. I thought it could reduce driver's inattention accidents, which is true, but I didn't foresee the new kinds of autonomous vehicle-related accidents that no human would provoke, and the subsequent responsibility avoidance that automated systems provide.
@Muse If only it was a speculative bubble like for NFTs and cryptocurrencies! Unfortunately, in this case it is a tool to reduce labor costs, so there's way more interest from trillion-dollar companies to use or sell the service.
My problem with #AI isn’t that it’s a new medium that would somehow threaten the existing ones, like printed books, radio, cinema, television, video games, social media and live streaming did before.
No, my problem is that it’s exactly the same mediums we’re used to, churning an endless stream of a cultural average, reifying it in the process, all the while infringing copyright on an industrial scale and guzzling energy and water like there’s no tomorrow.
It’s the exact opposite of a new medium that grants a new creative freedom and rewards trailblazing artists, instead flattening entire aesthetics genres into their most pleasing surface-level aspect thanks to the absence of creative effort to produce facsimiles at scale.
Like in role-playing video games where not picking a side makes you miss a lot of content, I feel like my personal aversion to commit to any cult (religion, mysticism, economic theories, technology, pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, etc...) is making me miss out on a lot of IRL content.
@A Sweet Gentleman Thanks, everything people have said so far in this thread seem to point to the same idea that nobody can make them change their mind about it, and it probably wouldn’t matter anyway.