They don't - something like this needs an Act or Congress.

SCOTUS made up some BS "Chevron Deference" in the 80's which has been abused like this since.

The current /Maine Fisheries/ case should dissolve Chevron deference.

We may like the FTC proposal on this one but with that kind of power and no representation it's only counting the days until they do something we absolutely detest. And then there's no effective recourse.

Weren't the founders and top management of Google citizens of Israel?

It dozen't seem all surprising from that perspective.

These protesters should have gone back to writing code to surveil Americans, I guess?

Sometimes a Good paperback at ThriftBooks is $1 less than a new one at Amazon so I just get the new one.

Weird market!

PS unless the recent printings have been Trust & Safety'ed.

Fiction:

12 books from the Deverry series
The Three Body Problem trilogy
Monkey
Treacle Walker
Various books on Powershell

Non-Fiction:
Linux Administrator's Guide
Linux Network Administrator's Guide
Both OpenZFS books
Ansible
Terraform
Various books on Oracle, MySQL, PostgreSQL optimisation
C++ manuals
Various Cisco manuals
OpenPF manual

Good flick if you want to get a feel for how Pharma sales work.

I'm surprised it hasn't be Pfbanned yet based on who it highlights.

EVs don't scale well. At a gas station if you have two people in front of you, you wait 20 minutes.

My home scales quite well, and there are zero people in front of me for both the garaged space and the driveway outside of it.

They always rant about Wayland, systemd, Pulse/Pipewire, devops, dkms, quic, zfs, etc.

I used to wonder why they don't just not upgrade their os, but then I realized they are lazy and want somebody else to maintain their old system for them.

I mean, even compiling gentoo with the right use set is too hard for these bellyachers.

Yet the humility never occurs to them that the non-lazy people who actually build distros are embracing the newer technology.

Instead the Old Farts case aspersions and ad-hominems at these hard workers. It's pathetic.

I'm done with their BS and won't help them understand anymore - the arguments are almost universally in bad faith.

Because otherwise they would just not upgrade. I have some Infomagic Slackware CD's from 1993 they might be interested in. Yeah, my first Linux box was over 30 years ago and I competently run all those technologies now. I don't fear change even though understanding new tech takes work and I can't just rest on my laurels.

But the superfluity of occurrence is not an excuse to let them continue to grow. The noise increases as a function of grown of population, and technologies serving them.

Inter-disciplinary education helps. Examples:

Better 511/utility search services, disciplined procedure, careful installation site survey techniques might have helped.

Communications network infrastructure additions, including redundancy, faster outage detection through hearbeat fault sensing, rapid deployment for fiber fixes, all these could increase uptime and reliability.

Backup resources beyond in-circuit redundancy to alternate services can offset the down circuit(s). These mean a different IP transport, perhaps Starlink, backup copper, re-routed diffuse mesh architectures, etc.

We have more online media to cite such outages, and so these problems appear to occur with more visible frequency, but in reality, things have always been fucked up, and now that complexity is increasing, we need to try much harder, instead of just harder to think through the dependencies in emergency communication.

Every change looks like corruption in the eyes of people who don't like it.

And corruption looks like evolution to some people.

Personally, I'm in favor of words meaning as much of the same thing over time as possible. It enhances communication and understanding. If you need a new meaning, you either need a new word or you need to explain yourself at a bit more length. Lest you "decimate" (cough) the listener's/reader's understanding... you get me?

I find cruise control a blessing on long drives. I can concentrate on other things, like the environment around me. Speeding tickets are also a non-issue.

My last rental car (in Texas for the eclipse) had adaptive cruise control, which I really like. I've looked in to retrofitting this to my own car (a 2016 Golf with dumb cruise control) but decided it's not worth the hassle. It also had lane assist. This showed me what it would be like to drive with an autopilot, though if it got angry with me if I took my hands off the wheel for more than 10 seconds. Nevertheless, I see the attraction.

...laura

The conservation laws are statistical, at least to a degree. Local apparent violations can be OK, provided the system as a whole absolutely complies.

There's no question that if the claim was as appears that the conservation laws would be violated system-wide, which is a big no-no.

So we need to look for alternative explanations.

The most obvious one is that the results aren't being honestly presented, that there's so much wishful thinking that the researchers are forcing the facts to fit their theory. (A tendency so well known, that it's even been used as the basis for fictional detectives.)

Never trust results that are issued in a PR statement before a paper. But these days, it's increasingly concerning that you can't trust the journals.

The next possibility is an unconsidered source of propulsion. At the top of the atmosphere, there are a few candidates, but whether they'd impart enough energy is unclear to me.

The third possibility is that the rocket imparted more energy than considered, so the initial velocity was incorrectly given.

The fourth possibility is that Earth's gravity (which is non-uniform) is lower than given in the calculations, so the acceleration calculations are off.

When dealing with tiny quantities that can be swamped by experimental error, then you need to determine if it has been. At least, after you've determined there's a quantity to examine.

In theory, the FBI is limited to domestic operation. The DIA, CIA, NSA, DEA, etc., are charged with non-US operations.

There is no legal mechanism to tell $small_utility that they have to fix their likely expensive if ancient (must get depreciation and a long service life) equipment.

We don't have a second, fortified Internet that's immune from international traffic; it's the world wide web, not the SECURE web.

Worse, you can bet that the aforementioned agencies are far, far up the tailpipes of most Chinese infrastructure, despite much of it being newer than that in North America and the EU.

This is a game of chess, and having dormant malware waiting for action is just one more chess piece in a bigger game, and exercise for a different vector of warfare, just like the space arms race.

As you cite, finger pointing does nothing but prevent funding of active methods of helping both rich and poor utility IT infrastructure from identifying actual problems, and presenting and monitoring real remedies. Don't shoot the messengers, instead, get the politicians to agree on methods to goad the private utility sector into action; this removes at least one small piece from the chess board.

First, you failed to fuck off. Try again.

Not going to happen.

Second... "They did quit first. They staged a sit in in an executive office with full knowledge that it'd likely result in their termination, and potentially worse." ...You're a complete moron, aren't you?

They quit. They knew quite well they were quitting. If how they quit hurt your feelings, I'm sure that they'd be happy to tell you to "fuck off" too.

Here's a fuck off from me for the hell of it. I don't expect you to actually comply, so come at me, bro.

LLMs cannot do it. Hallucination is baked-in.

LLMs alone definitely can't do it. LLMs, however, seem (to me, speaking for myself as an ML developer) to be a very likely component in an actual AI. Which, to be clear, is why I use "ML" instead of "AI", as we don't have AI yet. It's going to take other brainlike mechanisms to supervise the hugely flawed knowledge assembly that LLMs generate before we even have a chance to get there. Again, IMO.

I'd love for someone to prove me wrong. No sign of that, though. :)

I'll be impressed when one of these ML engines is sophisticated enough to be able to say "I don't know" instead of just making up nonsense by stacking probabilistic sequences; also it needs to be able tell fake news from real news. Although there's an entire swath of humans who can't do that, so it'll be a while I guess. That whole "reality has a liberal bias" truism ought to be a prime training area.

While I certainly understand that the Internet and its various social media cesspools are the most readily available training ground(s), it sure leans into the "artificial stupid" thing.