It's a huge system with a lot of people involved so no doubt there is abuse, but there is also natural and expected levels of variation in the complexity of patients that doctors doing notionally the same job will actually encounter. If you're doing an honest job and happened to have seen more complex patients than average I think you'd rightly be pretty angry if you were then forced to do more paperwork to justify yourself to an insurance company who starts downcoding your patients.
I think you're right to an extent (it's probably fair to say e.g. Einstein and Euler advanced their fields in ways others at the time are unlikely to have done), but I think it's much easier to work out who these people are after the fact whereas if you're dishing out a monster package you're effectively betting that you've found someone who's going to have this massive impact before they've done it. Perhaps a gamble you're willing to take, but a pretty big gamble nonetheless.
The trademark infringement is when their ad includes someone else's trademark.
Look at the screenshot in this post. All four of the ads at the top of the search results include the trademarked name "Midjourney" in the title of the ad.
This is more like putting up a giant sign outside of your Honda dealership saying "Best deals on new VWs!" but when you pull in they don't sell VWs, they sell their own competing products.
Some players circumvent this by creating "blog posts" where they compare/about multiple tools. Like it is a fair use but in reality is an ad in disguise.
The instagram app is infuriating for this. What possible reason is there for not allowing the user to select text in captions? I just want to put it into google translate so I can get a non-garbage translation of foreign language captions, or look something up on wikipedia, or paste a name in to my contacts, or...
So the workaround on android is to long press the bottom bar, send the screen off to gemini to OCR it, it'll recognise it's foreign language and then translate it for you. What a complete waste of time! You've got these remarkable LLM capabilities at your fingertips, and we're forced to burn energy working around these asinine restrictions for something as simple, as universal and as well understood as copying text.
I don't think there's any criticism of the (remarkable) things which have been achieved so far, more the breathless hype about how AI is going to solve all our current and future problems if we just keep shovelling money and energy in. Predicting the future is hard, and I don't think Sam is particularly better at knowing what's going to happen in ten years time than anyone else.
> Explicitly saying you're compatible with any future breaking changes!? You can't possibly know that!
I kind of like it in a way. In a lot of eco systems it's easy for package publishers to be a bit lazy with compatibility which can push a huge amount of work on package consumers. R seems similar to go in this regard, where there is a big focus on not breaking compatibility which then means they are conservative about adding new stuff until they're happy to support it for a long time.
I guess it wouldn't bother me if it weren't a semver expression. As a semver expression it's ridiculous on it's face, a breaking release will break your code until proven otherwise. "foo >= 2024R1", well, I'm not entirely comfortable with it but if you've got a comprehensive plan to address the potential dangers (as CRAN appears to), godspeed.
1. "This XML library is way bigger than what I need, I'll write something more minimal for my use case"
2. write a library for whatever minimal subset you need
3. crash report comes in, realise you missed off some feature x. Add support for some feature x.
4. Bob likes your library. So small, so elegant. He'd love to use it, if only you supported feature y, so you add support for feature y.
...
End result is x+1 big, complex XML libraries.
Obviously Im being a bit obtuse here because you might be able to guarantee some subset of it in whatever your specific circumstances are, but I think it's hard to do over a long period of time. If people think you're speaking XML then at some point they'll say "why don't we use this nice XML feature to add this new functionality".
They gained access to the Google account by stealing the verification code over the phone, but then they had easy access to other accounts (e.g. coinbase) because they had access to 2FA codes because Google authenticator was backed up to the users Google account.
You're right, but the proportion of leasehold is still somewhat high (about 7% of houses in the UK). Kinda weird that it's still a thing. There's also a good scam going where leaseholders will try and persuade you to buy out of the lease for X thousand £, because people want the piece of mind rather than paying the ground rent.
