sabin

"Still not voting for genocide"

You say as you side with Hamas who openly calls for the genocide of the Jewish race.

Well,.that's one way to solve the problem of not expanding your editor var correctly...

That's not the same as content distribution.

Sharing content to clients cannot be effectively done through creative cloud.

It does not make sense to try and stop the distribution at the level of video editing. Not only is the thought of child predators making regular use of professional editing software completely absurd, but even if you assume they do, why the fuck do you think they would use the inbuilt cloud sharing tools to do so?? They would just encrypt the contents and transmit it over any other file sharing service...

It makes no sense to implement this measure because it does absolutely nothing to impede criminals, but enables a company well known for egregious privacy violations unprecedented access to information completely law abiding clients have legitimate reasons to want to keep private.

It is a farce. A smokescreen intended to encroach on customers precious data all the while doing nothing to assist law enforcement.

Adobe is not a video distribution platform. They do not have this level of culpability.

Sounds like a smokescreen to me. All file sharing services have this problem. The solution is to respond to subpoena requests and let the government do their jobs. They do not have to allow themselves to arbitrarily violate their users privacy in order to do that.

"the AI isn't good enough to answer questions yet, it needs more training "

"YOU HYPOCRITE!! If the A.I is too bad to use then why are you training it!"

Clean the damn mold out of your brain.

Why would they remake core utils?

In short it's essentially a protocol that defines what type of requests must be sent between applications and a compositor.

I don't give a fuck about musk. I think hos Hyperloop is beyond idiotic and nothing he makes fucking works. In fact I never even said I necessarily think the state of Tesla autopilot is acceptable. All I said was that categorically rejecting autopilot (even for future generations where tech can be much better) for the express purpose of being able to prosecute people is beyond empty and shallow.

If you need to make up lies about me and strawman me to disagree you only prove my point. You stopped being a rational agent who weighs the good and bad of things a long time ago. You don't care about how good the autopilot is or can be. All you care about is your mental fixation against the CEO of the company in question.

Your political opinions should be based on principles, not whatever feels convenient in the moment.

Nothing was misguided and if anything your tone deaf attempt to double down only proves the point I'm making.

This stopped being about human deaths for you a long time ago.

Let's not even bother to ask the question of whether or not this guy could ultimately be saving lives. All that matters to you is that you have a target to take your anger out on the event that a loved one dies in an accident or something.

You are shallow beyond belief.

So you'd rather live in a world where people die more often, just so you can punish the people who do the killing?

I didn't say 64. I said 16 which is perfectly reasonable. Your comment reads like damage control from an apple employee.