It could recreate missing episodes using the extant episodes. That's something worthwhile doing until someone finds them. It's not creating a complete new series.
People want to find the missing episodes because of their historical value as actual human artistic creations, and not because they want to watch a thing that looks like an old missing episode.
There would be as much value in an "AI-recreated" missing episode as there would be in taking the audio of a modern episode and using AI to create a new video track for it.
Or a USian who has no idea which lawyers you are referring to obliquely, so as to look "cool" and "knowledgeable", while avoiding communication with the sullied masses?
It's not even ambiguous; JavaScript uses syntax inherited from C, so if you can program in JavaScript, you can program in C, where you get a performant, stable, and simple standard library, instead of the framework-of-the-month club in JavaScript.
True. The other side of 'fair' in this situation is what was the company earning.
Busting a gut to make some shareholders/managers loads of money isn't exactly fair if you aren't also being rewarded.
On the other hand, in the UK the NHS has traditionally paid people extra on the understanding that these things happen. But when it did happen the staff were asking for even more.
I know this probably comes across as right wing, but my point is how we reward people for black swan events.
> Busting a gut to make some shareholders/managers loads of money isn't exactly fair if you aren't also being rewarded.
Exactly. But it's not a matter of “being paid more than the marginal value of the additional work” as microeconomics tend to frame those things.
Symmetrically, people routinely accept pay cut or degraded work conditions when the company isn't going well, even though it makes no sense from a game theory perspective (it's basically a prisoners' dilemma yet people cooperate most of the time).
Is his ability to bear children important to the story?
reply