I didn't even know you could return clothes from most retailers. From online would make sense (you have no way of knowing if it'll fit right), but from a physical store you really don't have an excuse.
Brick and mortar stores still find it helpful to have their customers purchase first and ask for refunds later. They don't put up much of a fight on refunds until their customers start really abusing it.
Which they do, of course. Customers will try to return things still clearly bearing the label from a different store. They'll ask for a refund on a package of food they've eaten all of.
Still, it's easier to put up a minimum wage employee with zero discretionary power to just give them a refund on practically everything. They lose some money to fraud, but it means that many customers feel safe buying things. Often, they won't return it even if they were entitled to, and may well return to the store to buy the same thing in a size that fits. Fighting with them about it doesn't save enough to be worth the hassle.
If you actually read the full text of the law, it states:
" "Biometric identifier” means a retina or iris scan, fingerprint, voiceprint, or scan of hand or face geometry. Biometric identifiers do not include writing samples, written signatures, photographs, human biological
samples, [...] "
So if it's just pictures of faces, then it's okay. If, however, at any point in the pipeline the actual facial geometry is calculated or stored, that might be a violation.
When people violate the law, we incarcerate them, i.e. restrict their movement. Corporate stock should be incarcerated (i.e. movement restricted i.e. can not be sold/traded) when corporations break the law.
Since people cannot work from prison, corporations should be equivalent: they may not conduct any business. But since people in prison are still responsible for things like rent, corporations should keep paying rent and salary too. Not sure if it's possible to get a friend corporation to do that for you though…
They can easily add this "individuality" in RLHF. The base model won't know, correct, but the final user-facing model very much can if that's what they so desire.
IMO the big news here is that they created effectively a drop-in replacement for the Leela Chess Zero model - which ended up outperforming the best existing LC0 model. Could make LC0 more competitive long term vs. stockfish if they choose to adopt the chessformer architecture.
That's not what the previous comment is referring to. They're referring to false positives, i.e "Gemini did not generate this (or process it) yet it says SynthID confirmed"
So imagine the damage you could do to an artist by having Gemini flag it then saying “see here’s the proof they’re using AI art!” That person would get eaten alive.
reply