Migrated account from @CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world

  • 1 Post
  • 209 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 9th, 2024

help-circle




  • On December 11, 1939, the U.S. Government sued the Ball Brothers, the Hazel-Atlas Glass Co., and the Owens-Illinois Glass Co. under monopoly charges based on the Hartford-Empire and Owens licensing agreements. The plaintiff claimed that small producers were being frozen out of business or prohibited from entering manufacture by the nature of the licenses. Almost a decade later, in 1947, the justices rendered a final verdict. The court prohibited the Ball Brothers from purchasing or otherwise controlling any other businesses engaged in the same manufacturing processes – in other words, the small jar producers. In addition, Ball had to divest itself of the Three Rivers Glass Co. (already closed for almost a decade) that Ball had acquired in 1936. Ball sold the property




  • The government is cagey about how, exactly, this criminal activity was unearthed, noting only that Herrera “tried to access a link containing apparent CSAM.” Presumably, this “apparent” CSAM was a government honeypot file or web-based redirect that logged the IP address and any other relevant information of anyone who clicked on it.

    It looks like a combination of bad opsec and clicking on a download link.

    I know there has been some back and forth whether it’s good to use a VPN with tor and feel like this is just going to open up that conversation again.


  • Sovcits are… interesting.

    There’s an aspect of their philosophy that I get. Like there is a sort of magical incantation they say and proof you’re immune from the law.

    That’s sort of how courts work. We’re all about precedence, making sure that court rulings from before are applied fairly and equally. Knowing these rulings and how to apply them seems like magic to those of us who aren’t attorneys.

    And all law and court rulings are text that you can read, right? So anyone should be able to read and recite them, right?

    I sort of agree with the logic in the sense that I absolutely hate how any court action almost requires the services of an attorney. No matter how right you are, you still have to spend money to prove it in court.

    But the nonsense of not paying any taxes or not being held responsible for your actions…that is where I draw the line.





  • It’s been ages since I’ve done any serious science schooling so I’m hoping some random Internet people can help me out.

    When evolution like this occurs, it’s typically not one fish right? The idea is that several fish develop a trait that is beneficial that leads them away from water (or whatever), which they thrive in, causing them to reproduce with those same traits.

    At what point do scientists say that enough change has occurred that they are a new species?



  • I don’t think I explained it well.

    I shop at 4, maybe 5, different grocery stores. Some products I have preferences whereas others I don’t.

    For example, say this is my grocery list for the week:

    • grapes (never buy at Walmart)
    • composition notebook
    • ground turkey (only buy at Wegmans, unless there’s a sale)
    • oat milk
    • chocolate chips
    • eggs

    I want an AI to scrape every grocery store’s weekly ad or their website along with any coupons that are available, and determine the best price and, based on patterns of sales, what I should wait on and what time of day I should shop.


  • There was a Twitter post about great uses for AI but it’s not being developed. The one I aligned with was scraping grocery store ads and creating a shopping list based on the best prices and personal preferences.

    AI is solving problems for the business class. They are trying to stop paying people. AI has use cases to actually make our lives better but are antithetical to the capitalistic companies and would likely try to stop any AI use that undermines their bottom line.