No, more like Fox News, Alex Jones, Ben Shapiro, the whole of "Prager U", and all "conservative" talk show hosts on radio. The whole sector is so monotone in its servile service of whatever dogshit they decide is "conservative" that it could very easily be mimicked by AI. At least Al Jazeera has reporters traveling the globe. The entire "conservative" media enterprise consists of people spewing nonsense. Hell, it may already be AI generated.

You pussies cannot even hurl good insults.

> but they also quietly replaced the Russian malware with their own [US gov't snoopware], for national security.

I assume you are joking, otherwise we at Slashdot expect clear evidence of such claims.

Whether this is warranted or not, it will fuel gov't skeptics and conspiracists.

It may also generate invasion-of-privacy lawsuits. Is there a better way to go about it?

>It's not just that TNG had a big miss with the contractions thing

I thought that was an artificial limitation to keep Data a little bit different? Same designer built Lore, who didn't have a problem with contractions.

LOL. All those companies are US-based, the EUcrates wouldn't be able to force anyone to put any backdoors in anything anyway. So, since they're not gonna reach those grapes anyway, they're sure gonna virtue signal about how we're not trying.

Its even worse in Australia but as always, "you can get around it with eyes closed".

The only reason "Also" wonâ(TM)t work as a missing keyword is because the US is already well ahead of the rivals on this front.

There is nothing unexpected about this; it's completely obvious that generative AI would be used to supplement troll farms, malware and disinformation spreading, and general disruption of the US and allies. Anybody who didn't see this coming was simply not paying attention.

Only surprise here is that Iran and North Korea were top on the list. Would have expected Russia to be the number one in disruption. But maybe this is just because the Russian use of AI tools was better camouflaged because their hackers are professional.

I remember this being a big area of interest about 15 years ago, but there doesn't seem to have been much about it lately. So long as it's done in real time and just for the reader, and not an audience, I would be inclined to say that it's not infringing the reproduction right, derivative right, or most significantly, the public performance right.

I guess a societal misalignment could be in inviting profit-driven, narcissistic dummies to run the country perhaps? That sort of scenario?

If it's not fair use, and the court rules that it's not, do we then have to buy a new license every time we want to read a book once more?

How does a machine reading a book fundamentally differ from a human, and why would the act of reading constitute a copyright violation?

Am I misreading this, or is Sarah Silverman's argument really that she doesn't want machines reading her work without a pay-per-read license?

magnetism is easy, it's just a moving electric field. Attraction or repulsion is just exchange of vibrations in the electric field that change momentum of charged objects, the vibrations are called photons.

But we're not talking about climates when discussing gulf stream or ocean conveyor, it's two things much simpler. The sun forcing them won't stop, and there is nothing to counter the flow. It's very basic heating of a fluid and convections.

That's reality, stop believing agenda driven doom mongers that want to stop progress and civilization.

Just as gulf stream collapse has been utterly debunked by actual physicists so it is impossible for ocean conveyor to stop. Solar energy input will cause circulation in fluid, there is no way for it not too.