Perhaps you need to submit some stories that you thing would be more suitable. But I would only work for one of the named companies if I were desperate.

The Sam Altman types, and the Thiel/Musk types especially, want technofeudalism with them on top. For some of them the "good of society" factors in but it is always after this.

It's not clear that when you include all externalities fission power is the cheapest way to power the grid. But there are places where it probably is the cheapest way to power something. (Or if not cheapest, has other overriding benefits.)

OTOH, including all externalities is tricky. I'm always dubious when I read a claim that it's been done.

The FORTRAN IV that I wrote in the early 1960's would still compile and run today. The FORTRAN II that people were writing a few years earlier wouldn't even compile and run by the time I started programming.

230 prevents sites from being prosecuted. So, right now, they do b all moderation of any kind (except to eliminate speech for the other side).

Remove 230 and sites become liable for most of the abuses. Those sites don't have anything like the pockets of those abusing them. The sites have two options - risk a lot of lawsuits (as they're softer targets) or become "private" (which avoids any liability as nobody who would be bothered would be bothered spending money on them). Both of these deal with the issue - the first by getting rid of the abusers, the second by getting rid of the easily-swayed.

USENET predates 230.
Slashdot predates 230.
Hell, back then we also had Kuro5hin and Technocrat.

Post-230, we have X and Facebook trying to out-extreme each other, rampant fraud, corruption on an unimaginable scale, etc etc.

What has 230 ever done for us? (And I'm pretty sure we already had roads and aqueducts...)

I'd disagree.

Multiple examples of fraudulent coercion in elections, multiple examples of American plutocrats attempting to trigger armed insurrections in European nations, multiple "free speech" spaces that are "free speech" only if you're on the side that they support, and multiple suicides from cyberharassment, doxing, and swatting, along with a few murder-by-swatting events.

But very very very little evidence of any actual benefits. With a SNR that would look great on a punk album but is terrible for actually trying to get anything done, there is absolutely no meaningful evidence anyone has actually benefitted. Hell, take Slashdot. Has SNR gone up or down since this law? Slashdot is a lot older than 230 and I can tell you for a fact that SNR has dropped. That is NOT a benefit.

It may be temporary (I doubt it), but it's not "very temporary" as the same thing has been reported for months with pretty steadily increasing urgency.

OTOH, the AIs clearly aren't good enough to replace programmers, or probably even coders. So what's currently happening is probably jobs being redesigned to use an AI where it makes sense. Expect LOTS of failures in this redesign, but it will be the successes that shape the future...unless the AIs get a LOT better. (Currently they don't understand the problem they're trying to answer.)

Molten salt may well be a viable answer to many problems. But, yeah, it needs development...and it's not clear that it would be cheaper for grid based power.

You're assuming that the current skills will serve you later. This MAY be true, but is by no means guaranteed. The interfaces of current AIs are definitely quite immature, and can be expected to change a lot. Probably also their competency.

Plausible, if it's good enough. The real problem here is lots of shitty code being submitted. So much that they need quick ways to get rid of most of it.

As for "explain the code", that's trickier. I remember struggling to explain why I did something a particular way a few months later. When I figured it out again, it was the right approach, but it wasn't obvious why.

Well, prompts left in the comments isn't really a flaw, just an indication.

OTOH, what they're saying is "We're being swamped, so we're going to have to triage the code.", which is unfortunate, but reasonable.

Depends on the language. Where I worked you needed to work in SPAN (a language from SBC), but when they tried to shift us over to MADAM it basically didn't work. (I shifted over, but to PL/1.)

I wish I could say I'm surprised.

However, this has been a consistent pattern that goes back to the 1930s and I wouldn't raise an eyebrow if you corected that to the 1830s. Companies know that you make the most money by selling to both sides.

That's odd. I need large fonts, but I find dark mode unreadable. Black on cream or light beige is about ideal.