I’m not sure if I correctly get your point: DDG provides search results based on Bing and has advertisment contracts with MS but DDG in itself doesn’t track you:

From DDGs FAQ:

We partner with many different information sources to deliver DuckDuckGo Search (e.g., Microsoft for ads, Apple for maps, etc.). When you view search results (including ads), your searches cannot be tied back to you, either by us or our partners. How this works technically is we do not store any personal identifiers (e.g., IP address) with your search terms, and we also proxy all requests to partners through us.

Hallooo? Pass mal auf was Du sagst! Sie nehmen nichts, sie geben Dir Arbeit so wie Gott den Menschen das Manna gab. Sei mal lieber dankbarer!

Oder glaubt er sogar wirklich das er zu diesen 5000 gehört?

Ne, aber er vielleicht hofft er durch Fleiß und harte Arbeit irgendwann dazu zu gehören oder er befürchtet, dass unser aller “Wohlstand” gefährdet ist, wenn die Kommunisten den ganzen Familienunternehmern alles wegnehmen, sodass niemand mehr ein Unternehmen gründen möchte.

Switching from a search engine that heavily tracks you to a search engine that doesn’t is a privacy win.

No, they’re not, but they are one of the better-known alternatives to Google, and they do advocate privacy. This, in itself, is a good thing and should be promoted.

The problem is that Google’s monopoly on web search is so large that using Google is the de facto standard for the vast majority of people. Getting them to acknowledge that there are alternatives to Google benefits privacy on the internet more than DDG having contracts with MS harms it.

She wasn’t killed but your point stands: The headline, while obviously being clickbaity and maybe even trying to be funny hides the underlying problem:

Somehow, the dog had triggered the shotgun – which had a live round chambered – to fire, damaging the vehicle and striking a female passerby.

[…]

It is illegal in Nebraska to drive with a loaded shotgun in your vehicle.

If your Toyota is a Hilux it may as well perform way better as a boat than a Cybertruck.

Maybe try GRIS. It’s a 2D platformer journey with amazing presentation.

Yeah but it’s puzzles are hardcore. I really struggled with this.

Nah that’s not my point at all. I’m not saying all that space, alien and tech stuff doesn’t qualify as sci-fi because of the mysticism/prophecy/magic. My point is that you could probably tell Star Wars’ tale just as well without all those aspects in a traditional fantasy setting for example. Sci-fi, in my opinion, utilizes science or technology to start thought experiments and tell stories that wouldn’t be possible.

Take for example “Do Androids dream of electric sheep?” (the book Bladerunner is based on): The story tackles the ethical question at which point an artificial lifeform can be considered a person and should be treated as such. This is classic sci-fi: Take a fictional advanced technology and discuss the ethical or societal problems that may result from this technology.

This is something at least classic Star Trek does quite often while most of Star Wars’ technology could very well be replaced by fantasy elements without the underlying story being fundamentally different.

Hinsichtlich der Lautstärke schneiden Bögen natürlich deutlich besser ab, als Feuerwaffen…

I haven’t watched newer works in the Star Wars franchise but in my opinion Star Wars doesn’t qualify as science fiction but is more like a space fantasy story.

Science fiction is more like a thought experiment: What would happen if society or technology would develop in this or that way? That’s what Star Trek is doing for the most part (at least the older installments).

Edit: To be clear: I am not saying, Star Wars is bad. It is obviously highly regarded for a good reason. Im just saying it’s not science fiction.

Based on this random fact I honestly would invite you to my party (if I’d host any parties at all). Why would anyone think that you’re not fun at parties?

No, what they meant is: The control group had 12 questions to get into the flow of solving math problems and then solved three more math problems for good measure.

The AI group on the other hand got into the flow of formulating math problems to ChatGPT and then had to actually solve three math problems themselves

Their critique is, that solving math problems yourself and prompting ChatGPT to solve math problems are not necessarily comparable tasks and require different skill sets so disabling AI after 12 tasks meant the first group had to switch context and therefore had worse performance.

If you want to analyze the first groups general ability of problem solving you should give them again twelve tasks after disabling AI so they get used to this new type of task (solving math problems yourself vs. prompting math problems to the AI) before measuring their performance.

But what you’re describing is not that uncommon, even without AI: Oftentimes when trying to solve a complex problem and being unsuccessful you have to reset your brain by doing something fundamentally different or have a good night of sleep and after that you solve the problem easily.

May what you’re experiencing is not AI related at all.

Yes and it’s not like there a no privately owned companies in China.

Because at this point the only ones profiting from automation are the capitalists.

Ich beschwer mich ja gar nicht über den Artikel sondern darüber, dass die Überschrift auf “Deutschland hat die meisten Abgaben” verkürzt ist und betone, dass diese Verkürzung oft vorkommt und in meinen Augen ein Problem darstellt. 🤷

Naja aber genau das muss man herausstellen: Ich schließe mich anderen Usern an: Wenn heute in der politischen Debatte über “Die Abgabenlast!” gesprochen wird, fühlen sich Unternehmer und Reiche immer sofort mitgemeint und lobbyieren für weiteres Schleifen der Erbschaftssteuer und Senkung der Unternehmenssteuer. Wenn man aber diejenigen, die am stärksten belastet sind, entlasten möchte, muss man an die Mehrwertsteuer und die Sozialbeiträge ran, die beide geringe Einkommen überproportional hoch belasten.

Wenn man aber dazu übergehen würde, immer wieder herauszustellen, dass Erwerbs-Einkommen stark besteuert werden während Vermögen, hohe Erbschaften und Kapitalerträge wenig bis gar nicht, könnte man sichtbarer machen, wer sich hier gemessen an seiner Leistungsfähigkeit besonders stark oder eben weniger am Gemeinwohl beteiligt

Und von welchen Steuern sprechen wir? Ich nehme ja an, es geht um die Einkommenssteuer. Wenn man die Erbschafts- oder (Gott bewahre!) Vermögenssteuer betrachtet, steht DE sicher nicht an der Spitze. Und überhaupt sind Steuern an und für sich kein Problem, wenn aus ihnen gesellschaftliche Aufgaben bezahlt werden.