Not really. I’ve seen plenty of sponsored YT Shorts, properly tagged and everything so YT’s definitely got the infrastructure in place to monetize Shorts. But most sponsors aren’t going to pay for a Short because… well, it’s too short, so those tend to be few and far between.

However, Shorts aren’t profitable for their ability to directly monetize your content, they’re profitable for their ability to drive a LOT of new viewers to your longer-form content. The Shorts algorithm is very aggressive at referring you to channels you aren’t subscribed to, and that has helped a lot of creators get very large followings, very quickly.

Thor/Pirate Software is an excellent example of this; he’s always had a pretty decent following, but once he started putting out YT Shorts, his subscriber and view counts began skyrocketing, which has also overflown into new Twitch subscribers, as well. He started with a small but healthy community, and has blown up into a huge, multi-platform community, and has easily doubled his YT earnings since engaging with Shorts.

Shorts are very helpful to creators right now. More creators need to realize that creating YT Shorts is basically creating ads for your own YT channel, on YT, for free. It’s probably the closest thing to “IRL money dupe glitch” that there is.

Cowwowado woman facey-wacies a bunch of big mean chargie-wargies

If your work hands your paycheck to a stranger, they still owe you money.

That’s not how these platforms work. They’re not the employer of the driver. The drivers are independent contractors, which means they’re not on payroll and they don’t get a paycheck. They get untaxed earnings, which are held in their DoorDash account until they transfer them to their bank. Legally, DoorDash’s responsibility ends once they credit the driver’s account, because it’s up to the drivers to not get phished.

Obviously, you can make arguments over the ethics of independent contract work in general, but this distinction is important to take note of, as independent contractors don’t have the same benefits or protections that employees would, and there are much different legal processes involved.

DoorDash owes their employees money, not excuses.

Read the article:

[DoorDash] also said it has reimbursed or tried to reimburse workers who were stolen from.

Lol it’s like Nintendo just wants to back itself into a corner and waste away with its IP.

This is a Switch emulator, meaning these are games that are still available for sale. It’s not like taking down a SNES emulator or something Nintendo hasn’t made available for 30+ years, it’s involving games they’re selling today. Taking down an emulator is literally Nintendo protecting its IP.

I honestly have no desire to purchase anything from them anymore.

If you were using this emulator, you weren’t likely purchasing anything from them in the first place. And I’m no doctor, but… I’d have to imagine that’s likely the reason Nintendo took this down to begin with.

Seriously, with all the other bad celebrity news lately, I expected the worst.

I couldn’t stand Linkin Park when they were first getting popular. I felt that they were too edgelord-y for me and wrote them off. Now, I wish I had actually given them a shot earlier on.

There was a pond nearby, but the fireflies would usually gather pretty far from it. I’m pretty sure it was the grass that they were attracted to, but I didn’t consider the flowers! There were a few bushes that I recall, though I can’t remember what type of flower they actually had. But I do remember them being really pretty in the springtime, but that’s not really a helpful description lol.

It’s been years since I’ve seen them. They used to always come out around this time of year when I was a kid, but it feels so rare to see one anymore.

At an old job I had, there was this garden-like section of this courtyard area people would take smoke breaks in. They had a special breed of grass planted there that seemed to attract the fireflies, and I guess it works because they’d actually show up to that little patch of garden almost year-round. I wish I knew what type of grass it was; I’d totally buy some seeds and do some guerrilla gardening around my apartment complex to bring back some fireflies.

The prompts aren’t generally considered enough because there’s too little control over the final expression, the same prompt can create wildly different outputs.

AI art isn’t made by just entering a prompt, picking an output image, and calling it a day. There’s actually a lot more involvement necessary to get the final output to be what you want. Some more advanced pieces of AI art take hours of tweaking the prompt and redoing certain sections, balancing positive and negative prompts and their weighting, not to mention training a model in the first place and touching up the final output in Photoshop.

There’s a very big industry behind AI art right now, and they’re not just using DALL-E prompts to do it. Whatever your thoughts about AI art may be, there’s no denying that a large amount of human labor is involved in the creation of any piece.

What’s the difference between one technology you don’t understand (AI engine-assisted ) and another you don’t understand (human-staffed radiology laboratory)?

The difference is that people think they understand AI. Even here in this thread, there are people confusing this for an LLM.

Purge works both ways, Donnie.

I’m sure that an argument can be made that the final output can’t be generated without the human-created prompt. Generative AI doesn’t output images on its own without a seed/prompt, much like a canvas doesn’t paint itself and a camera doesn’t open the shutter on its own.

Remember the video of him getting into a fight with some teenage girl just a few days before he killed those people? The video they wouldn’t let the jury see because it might show that Rittenhouse was an escalation-seeking rage-aholic? The video that his spokesperson has definitely seen?

Yeah, he was never disillusioned. He knew who this bastard was all along. He just stopped making money off the kid, is all.

I use an animation from this live wallpaper app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.at2_software.terracollageapp&hl=en_US

I believe it was just a one-time purchase for the full version of the app. The animations don’t loop very well, but I’m not staring at my home screen long enough to see the loop that often, so it’s not a big concern to me. They’re pretty much all swirly, inky, starry sort of abstract animations, but there’s a lot of color options so it’s pretty easy to pick something that fits well with the rest of your phone’s theme.

The developer hasn’t updated it for over a year now, so if the previews don’t look like something you’d like, I wouldn’t bother buying the full version since it’s unlikely that any more will be added.

Your TV doesn’t need a screensaver. You can just… turn it off.

You’re trusting that a) they’re not malicious and b) they have their shit together and c) even though they do have their shit together someone doesn’t find a random exploit anyhow.

You could say this about literally any solution short of hand-delivering cash in person.

You do realize that if the bank authorizes a transfer, that you did not… it’s wire fraud and they’re obligated to refund that cash, regardless if they recoup the cash or not.

You do realize that not every transaction happens in countries where these protections exist, right? Not everybody can rely on something like the FDIC to protect their funds.

On the other hand, if you give your credentials to a 3rd party, that’s against the ToS none of us actually read, and if something happens to your account; they’re going to deem it as your fuck up.

You’re not providing your bank credentials directly to the third-party, either. They use OAuth-like systems to log you in, typically. I’m not familiar with Ozow, specifically, but from what I can tell about their company, they appear to be doing mostly the same things as Plaid.

It’s also risky to give. Banks will generally approve all transactions between two accounts if one of them is a business account, because the assumption is that those are business transactions and are legitimate 99.99% of the time, so there’s very little scrutiny involved for those transfers. Giving the merchant your routing/account number gives them access to make withdraws from your account at will and at any time and can’t be revoked, and giving that access to somebody you may not fully trust the reputation of is a dangerous move.

A trusted financial institution as a middleman can be useful for those situations, because they’ll tokenize your details to expose as little as possible to the merchant, directly. These services are typically insured, so even if something did happen to your account, you’re more likely to get your money back than if you gave a merchant direct ACH access to your bank account. It’s basically a modernized version of Western Union.

That’s unusual, but not unheard of. Some online merchants will allow you to make payments via ACH transfers. Can be useful for things like international purchases or if you don’t have a normal credit/debit card to use. Sometimes smaller merchants will prefer this, if they don’t have an existing business partnership with a payment processor already.

Usually these will go through a third-party system that tokenizes your login with your bank. This way the merchant can only access your routing/account numbers to do the transfer. As for why you’d need to provide your bank login instead of the routing/account numbers directly, it’s usually just a form of fraud prevention, as the login verifies that you’re actually the account owner and not trying to pay with a checkbook you found on the street.

It’s similar to Plaid, which is a near-identical service that some merchants in the US use. From what I can tell, Ozow appears to be legitimate, so realistically it’s probably safe to enter your login details as long as you’re not getting any certificate errors on the page.

E: Not sure why this is downvoted. I’m not saying it’s a good system, just saying that it’s not inherently a scam.

Are you a goat?