So they are not trying to avoid returns, rather, they are going above and beyond what the law requires. If you choose to engrave something you know it can't be returned, that is common sense, not a trick.

At $15/hr, $8000 is 533 hours. So you are only breaking even if you get more than 22 full days of human folding labor (not the actual, slower time it takes the robot) during the useful life of the machine (probably 2-3yr max since it relies on backend supervision like a waymo). ChatGPT estimates that a human could fold about 27,000 shirts over 533 work hours.

But why would you pay thousands and store a clunky machine in your home for that? Either you don't care about the bed being made or not -- in which case just don't, its not essential -- or you'd have it made already in 30-60 seconds when you got up before you could even get the thing turned on.

Folding laundry is the same thing. It says 30-90 minutes, I assume for one wash load? A human couldn't possibly take more than 30 minutes. And a human with a folding board could do it in 5-10. So unless you do not care about laundry at all, it would drive you crazy to watch that machine blocking your hallway for over an hour slowly folding a single load.

Alternatively, a wash/dry/fold service will deliver them to your door not just folded, but neatly packed in dustproof bags. (This is a major life hack when packing for a trip btw.)

(Again, could be trivially bypassed either by rewriting, mocking the timezone call, or just changing the timezone. But we are assuming no mitigation used.)

Interestingly, my device is in Shenzhen right now, but macOS has assigned Shanghai as the "closest city" rather than Hong Kong which is geographically closer. I am curious if there is any documentation on how that is assigned.

I don't care if the balance is one million, before that ACH can process, every single dollar can be (a) wired out, (b) cleared out by yesterday's ACHs (bills, autopay, whatever) and checks, or (c) spent at debit/ATM.

I probably shouldn't tell you why I know that some fintechs don't address this.

I'm not really sure what output file even means for an interpreted language, but GCC doesn't ask either, it will spit out an a.out by default (not even .elf or something logical).

The wording is very ambiguous, but to me it suggests the opposite. If legal was question why the logo was on the account profile picture, not just that specific repo's content, that would imply the entire account was unauthorized, right?

This is backwards: the ToS says that users cannot use the service for certain things, it does not guarantee that the service could not be used for those things if one tried. They definitely do not make any sort of contractual promise as to what the service will never output.

I thought you had to use a program called netcat for that--if not then what is the point of that binary? And for that matter, can't you also use telnet to manually send HTTP?

LLMs are already being kept closed weight/source by default. On the client side it's just a generic API client. The underlying technology (weights) wasn't going to be exported even if allowed.

But what's more interesting isn't binary access or not--it's monitoring the chat content, and potentially influencing its replies. (Perhaps the old GPS SA is a better analogy than encryption export.) For example, model providers could be required to allow the government to detect suspected foreign government users and silently degrade performance. They could be required to flag potential exploit discoveries and then send them to CISA for remediation. Or, they could be required to inject disinformation about sensitive topics so that even if you jailbreak, the model is incapable of discussing topics like, say, the presidential motorcade or the design of military bases.