Do we like samsung all of a sudden?

In my opinion its a direct response to the advice that this can be turned into a positive, and is just pointing out that its technically based on a deceptive principle so you should not make a habit out of it.

I think its fair to consider the situation from all involved perspectives, including the Dads friend.

Dudes just saying you can be deceptive without intending it. Its not the craziest idea is it?

To avoid abusing the sunk cost fallacy, it would be best to tell the dad that is not the correct rate, and to please reach out to their friend with the correction.

No chance of someone feeling like they might as well choose youre higher rate because they are already talking to you.

What you call manipulating words is just a different perspective, neither of us is breaking any laws, and this is absolutely about morals. Your perspective apparently is that none of thus warrants any moral consideration at all. I disagree.

Of course noones trying to stop you, we are talking about why you use something and I wont, thats it. If you only care about what benefits you personally, of course youll butt heads with people who choose to apply a different methodology for what is good or bad. What was your point in even commenting on here, just fear you’d lose your new tool?

Creating art for yourself is a fiction. Doing nearly anything for yourself is a fiction. As much as some feel they prefer to be alone, noone lives in a bubble.

When you talk about barriers to entry for art, you really mean high quality art. Sure, perfectionists will be able to outdo their outsized expectations of themselves, briefly. The barriers to making art have been incredibly low for all of human history if you really are talking purely about the cost to begin making art. You and I can start cresting art with our hands right now. How much lower can the barriers be?

It seems to me you would find it easier to work on your perspective that prevents you from enduring the failure required to learn high quality art than to advise we steal all art globally and historically, combine it into a program using the energy of a large nation, and present it to you at your home over the internet.

But like you said, we all have our perspectives on what is important.

The comparison to cars is interesting, although cars maybe have peaked already and I doubt technology has.

I dont think proprietary information is helping much either. Makes young folk think they need to get a job at Google to work on something real and important.

I wish all this AI stuff was limited to just creating a new coding language. That I can get behind, sharing programming information is not the same as copying others art.

Maybe.

It could also cause immense frustration when people realize that all the time they spent creating AI art is essentially wasted when it comes to learning a new skill.

It could give people false expectations about the effort needed to make art. It could flood the internet with AI art to the point where it hides individual artists even more, driving down demand due to over supply.

Also, you dont need to create stunning works to motivate people to create more art, the problem is people not accepting the learning process which involves a hell of a lot of mediocrity and failure along the way. AI tools are not going to improve the average persons perspective, who likely thinks you need to be born with a gift to be an artist.

I think they mean that they were the last generation who was alive and learning about how things were built and innovated on, while newer generations won’t have that benefit.

They will be exposed to high level tools instead that automate a lot of the work which will make things easier for them but reduce understanding.

Thus, the newer generations on average will need to purposefully dig back into the past to learn what the older generations learned by just being around while it was happening.

These are just general trends though, its not going to be very practical to try to apply it to any individuals, or the group of people you work with.

Randomized keypads are for touchscreens, although like you said sort of not common for desktop workstations.

Just comparing a password to biometrics though on say a laptop or desktop, there is the major drawnback that you can be forced either knowingly or unknowingly to put in a biometric to unlock a device. It would be easier to circumvent then a standard password (at my company and the clients we work with, 16 characters is standard) with an encrypted hard drive.

This is all deduction ive made from other things I know to be true though, if you happen to know of a resource that explains both methods of securing g a workstation and the risks associated, I’d love to read it.

I also do agree overall that password less makes the most sense now, as people are never going to get better at making secure passwords and remembering them.

I do understand the point that the biometrics are replacing very short pins usually, oftentimes 4 digits only but I dont quite see how that makes the passcodes worse than the biometrics.

I’d say even a 6 digit passcode with a randomized number pad, alongside an emergency wipe pin, would do better than biometrics, which also need to have a passcode setup as backup anyhow.

Maybe you could play out a few scenarios that illustrate your point?

I would never consider fingerprints or face scans to be secure even for personal devices. I guess if theres literally nothing to protect, if thats possible.

Well maybe theres other ways you can make up the difference. Smaller companies might be in lower cost of living areas. even if working from home it can be nice to live near work. I’m not too sure how all this remote work stuff has changed hiring though.

Think smaller? Company-wise that is.

Apply for those jobs as if they didnt ask for prior experience. Simple trick.

Its because they have laws they have to follow, and if they break them I can take them to court. My last employer had to send out checks to make up missed wages over 5 years recently. It happens here regularly. Companies make mistakes and people take them to court. Its only the absolutely giant ones that might even have a way around it. I wouldnt even expect any of the big tech companies to keep any of my information private though to be honest.

I know you are pointing out that the end result is almost always better if you keep taking shots, but keep in mind that for some, the whole process is worse than average and can be an extremely exhausting and negative experience.