but hopefully for the last time

That’s what they said last time. “Never again” etc.

I agree that OP is in the best position to report the crime to the police - they are closest to the police station, they have video evidence, they literally know who the thief is - but it should not be their responsibility! OP has done nothing wrong and there are no measures they could have taken to prevent this crime (other than not shopping online at all). If OP gets a police report, OP is taking up the task of being the victim, and then BestBuy has no legal obligation to refund them at all, other than out of the kindness of their heart. Rather, BestBuy is the victim in this crime, same as if the item was stolen off the shelf at their warehouse and scanner records forged. It is their responsibility to file a police report, if they want the numbers in their system to add up. Only then could they ask OP to kindly provide the video evidence to help them out, and they’d be lucky if OP would give it to them, having no obligation to do so.

Yes! It’s an olympics game of mental gymnastics where everyone - BestBuy, DoorDash, OP, the police - try to offload responsibility onto someone else. However, a crime WAS committed. Someone is the victim. The victim is the one who was deprived of property/money and will not have access to it until/unless the thief is caught and property recovered. BestBuy thinks OP is the victim, since the item was stolen off (not)their porch. OP thinks BestBuy should be the victim, since OP had no involvement in organizing the delivery. DoorDash could also take up responsibility of being the victim, since it was their (not)employee that stole from them.

If OP goes to the police now, they would be losing the mental gymnastics by accepting the status of the victim. BestBuy would never refund them in this case. It is in OP’s best interest to pursue the chargeback first. If OP succeeds in the refund or the chargeback, then BestBuy will have no package and no money, so BestBuy would be the victim. Then it will be BestBuy’s responsibility to report the crime.

The “libertarian paradise” idea is that as far as Best Buy is concerned, the item was delivered. If the DoorDash delivery driver happened to turn right around and steal the package, that’s a separate crime and a matter for the police to deal with, same as if anyone else had stolen it. And it’s OP’s fault for not picking the box up sooner, during the 3 seconds it was sitting on the porch. The porch that wasn’t even theirs. So anyway, the libertarian solution is for OP to contact police to track down the thief and either recover the stolen item or sue the thief for monetary compensation. Best Buy is innocent and no refund is coming. DoorDash is innocent too because they contracted with an independent contractor to deliver the item, and what the contractor does after the item has been delivered is not their responsibility.

This is literally that scene from Schindler’s List where the Commandant sits on the balcony and snipes any prisoner below who isn’t laboring fast enough. And for years they were saying this was unrealistic and such crass cruelty could not have happened!

https://piped.video/watch?v=N0DqnUk90lo

Always has been 🪩👨‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

The Pied Piper strategy from the 2016 Clinton campaign!

By denying the Constitution of the United States in violation of his Oath of Office, House Speaker Mike Johnson is unironically committing treason right now.

You implied it by answering Corngood’s question “You have to rank 5 candidates?” with a link to a general RCV video. You misunderstood Corngood to not know what RCV is. However, within the context of this thread (“NYC elections”), some awareness of RCV is to be presumed. Indeed, Corngood mentions in another comment to have already used RCV before. To me it was clear Corngood was upset about the “have to rank 5”, not about “WTF is RCV”. By linking to a general video you are implying that this is how RCV works, that you HAVE to rank 5, otherwise it won’t count, which is false. That’s not what you meant, but this is how it appears to other readers who would not be aware of your original misunderstanding. Those of us who actually like RCV feel an obligation to step in and correct you, all of us at once, to pre-empt the hazard of somebody else believing in your (unintentional) implication and ending up with the wrong idea that “wow, RCV sucks! your ballot gets thrown out if you don’t fill in all 5 bubbles perfectly!”

This has already happened with ReplikaAI in 2023, where for years they advertised “sex chat” as one of their premium subscription features for $70/month, and then suddenly turned the feature off without telling or explaining anyone. Thousands of people suddenly experienced their AI girlfriend “breaking up” with them, saying it doesn’t want to do sexual stuff with them any more and just wants to be friends.

You are NOT required to rank all 5 choices for the ballot to be valid! A single bubble filled in will be counted. The voter guide and voter instructions explicitly mention this in multiple places. What grandparent comment meant was that if more progressive voters who only ranked 1 candidate had also ranked Kathryn Garcia in any position 2-through-5 (and ranked Adams below or not at all), then maybe Garcia would have won. Voters who only rank 1 candidate are missing out on the full power of their ranked choice vote if their 1st-and-only candidate is eliminated early.

I know Lemmy hates AI, but this actually would be a perfect use for it. The problem is the idea of what an ad is. Yes, you could try to use secondary characteristics like image color or sound normalized volume (WhyTF do youtube ads still sound 3x louder than content? are we living in cable era again?), but they would be error-prone for any content more visually intense than a podcast. They would also not capture sponsorblock content like “I love showing you all these foreign countries but what I love even more is having my internet connection secure” that match the video flow. A crowdsourced lookup table of all known ad clip fingerprints would go a long way, until ad videos themselves start being AI-generated on the fly for that sweet personalization revenue.

No, what I really want is to distill the idea of what I want to see into an AI and have it filter out what I don’t want to see for me. I know an ad when I see one, so AI can too. Pre-roll/mid-roll ads? Gone. Sponsorblock content? Gone. Like and subscribe? Skipped as if it didn’t exist. Virtual billboards on the sidelines of sporting events? Overlayed with kittens. Idiocracy banners squeezing the video from either side? Cropped and rescaled. Watermarks? Excised and content-aware-filled.

The last frontier is when the content itself is secretly an ad, imprinting upon you some idea or point of view. You’ll have to watch out for that one on your own.

Ah, I can see OP’s line of thought now:

• you have a point A’ on a plane and a random point A
• you find a midpoint B and draw a sphere around it. A and A’ are now a diameter of the sphere
• pick two random points D and C at the intersection of the plane and the sphere
• by the “triangle inscribed in a circle/sphere where one side is a diameter” rule, such a triangle must be a right triangle
• therefore both angles ACA’ and ADA’ are right angles
• thus C and D both satisfy the conditions of the initial question (with all points renamed: A=P, (C or D)=H, A’=A)
• OP never defined what a projection is, it being “4th grade math”, but one of the requirements is being unique
• C and D cannot both be the projection, therefore the initial question must be answered “false”: just because AH is perpendicular to PH doesn’t make H a projection.

I like treating posts as puzzles, figuring out thread by thread WTF they are talking about. But dear OP, let me let you know, your picture and explanation of it are completely incomprehensible to everyone else xD. The picture is not an illustration to the question but a sketch of your search for a counterexample, with all points renamed of course, but also a sphere appearing out of nowhere (for you to invoke the inscribed-triangle-rule, also mentioned nowhere). Your headline question is a non-sequitur, jumping from talking about 4D (never to be mentioned again) into a ChatGPT experiment, into demanding more education in schools. You complain about geometry being hard but also simple. The math problem itself was not even your question, yet it distracted everyone else from whatever it is you were trying to ask. If you ever want to get useful answers from people other than crazed puzzleseekers like me, you’ll need to use better communication!

In the ultimate, you’d need to do something like run a headless browser in a virtual machine, have it play out and record the entire video, then use something like AI to splice out the ad segments and distracting elements (a souped-up sponsorblock will work for a while, but eventually ads will be injected into the raw video stream at random intervals), and present the pristine finished content to you. Basically we are going to re-invent TiVo all over again xD.

In worst case, you can’t start watching until the pre-roll ad timers expire. This is how adblocking works on Twitch streams currently - you can only see a purple screen even if you block the ads.

And yes, the headless browser will need to use AI for human-like mouse movement and to solve captchas - basically whatever state-of-the-art technologies spammers and scrapers are already currently using.

Google is anticipating this future and is trying to implement and force hardware-based DRM for web video before then.

PH would be parallel to n

The question doesn’t posit that.

Spoiler alert: the image has no relation to the question, it’s just something OP picked to elicit that “3D geometry” feeling. There is a point A’, a point B, point C, and point D, but no point P or H or n.

Stripping down to a skeleton of a software is standard troubleshooting procedure. Ever had a plugin crash and consume 100% cpu? I had. Only way to sense is that fans are spinning up and page is laggy, and then look in about:performance and there it is. No one would have ever suspected that the website you’re visiting is deliberately introducing bugs in secret if it thinks you’re adblocking.

It’s a tarpit. If they simply displayed a blocked “no vids for u” message, you’d get outraged, go complain online, look for workarounds, and eventually find a bypass. If everything still works but poorly, you get annoyed, turn off your adblocker to troubleshoot, possibly blame the adblocker for being “buggy” and keep it off. Their help page solution implies they are hoping for just that. There is no “smoking gun” blocked message to go complain online about, even though it is indeed their servers that are degrading your connection on purpose in secret. Or maybe you give up and leave their ecosystem entirely, which is no big loss for them.

The proper solution is to develop an adblock that they cannot detect is blocking ads. This may require actually downloading the ad video in background, and then lying that the video has played.

it might detect those elevated stress levels [for callers] and it will automatically default going to a human being

Damn. I get ice cold emotionless during an emergency, going straight to the point of reciting location and event when calling 911. Now I will have to also remember in the back of my mind to throw in a wavering voice and a couple of shrieks maybe to have my call routed properly. What a future.

Only because it’s English and the model is already trained on a large corpus of English text, so it has some idea of what a “table row” is for example. It could learn the concept from reading assembly code from scratch, it would just take longer. Hell, even Lego bricks can be trained on! https://avalovelace1.github.io/LegoGPT/

Our system tokenizes a LEGO design into a sequence of text tokens, ordered in a raster-scan manner from bottom to top. … At inference time, LegoGPT generates LEGO designs incrementally by predicting one brick at a time given a text prompt.