FileMakerFeller

NYC362 said:

As a retired history teacher, inaccuracies in movies often drive me nuts.  When a big film came out, I would go through a list of what it got wrong with my students.  (Braveheart, for instance was one of the worst for accuracy.).  Even good films like Hidden Figures play all sorts of games with the timelines and inventing characters that didn't exist.  Steven Spielberg did that in Schindler's List- combining two or three real people into one fictitious character. The reasons for this is usually just time. Without playing games like that, movies would be two or three times as long.  

Of course, it can get ridiculous.  I haven't yet seen Napoleon, so I can't comment on that film just yet.  The real problem is people will see a film about some historical event and not look up anything about the real version of things.  I can't watch For All Mankind because it's truly alternate view of history (of course it doesn't pretend to be factual at all) in some people's eyes will thing that's what happened.... UGH! 

Don't get me started on U-571...

Part of the problem is that even when you know the historical record, bits of the movies still come to mind when you think about the subject. It is incredibly difficult to separate the different sources after a while - then again, one should always read the historical accounts with a healthy dose of scepticism as well.

It's not a recent phenomenon, either - Rameses II erected many monuments celebrating his "victory" over the Hittites in the 13th Century BCE, each monument telling a more fanciful version of events the closer it is to Egypt. The Roman Emperor Octavian (commonly known as Augustus) deliberately publicised events during his reign as happening in a different chronological order some twenty years after the fact.

So if anyone is going to watch the Napoleon movie, I encourage them to research the available historical documents beforehand. The first time you encounter information about something you assume it is the truth, and that is very hard to shift later on.

badmonk said:

gatorguy said:

planetary paul said:

Obviously the intention was to kill off the company. Some serious litigation is in order methinks.

I think it has more to do with Sam Altman throwing caution to the wind to chase profits, while the board's view was to work as a non-profit, and more carefully with greater consideration for the potential dangers. Employees with stock options, thus "skin-in-the-game", would logically side with Sam. 

Apparently what Mr Altman was telling the board left a few things out, not a surprise considering what has been reported about his personality. 

Agree completely Gator, plus add two dollops of outright greed to the dish.  The money at stake in their eyes is just too great that the altruistic concerns to be careful are going out the window.

And for those of you who think that MSFT will immediately profit from this need to be aware that the computing power to run LLMs is so ridiculously expensive that their investment is going to take awhile to come to fruition.

I think white collar jobs are going to be under threat this time around unlike the automation efficiencies that affected blue collar work.  Interesting times.

OpenAI has been using the Azure cloud to run its software. MS already has all the compute required.

"Deeply questionable" rumour marked only as "Unlikely" by AI. LOL.

If you are already wearing Vision Pro, why would you have the monitor on at all? Just connect using the AVP as the display.

You want zero transaction fees? Use cash. Cash comes with other costs, they just don't occur at the point of exchange.

Everything digital has to make use of infrastructure that costs money to own and operate. Everything based on debt has to borrow the money from somewhere and the people who are lending the money want to be paid for that service.

Your new "better than everything else" thing has its own costs too, you were just blind to them in your zeal for digital everything. Now that you see them, maybe it's time to re-evaluate if the new thing really is better than the old things.