But your AI can hide all your bigotry behind a cloud! Then you can have it imagine excuses as to why a certain group is picked on by the system. Don't even need to make up lies for it anymore. Even if you are guilty from some bug leaking out proof, just donate to Trump. problem solved.

And you've done nothing to explain what the use case is. As far as I can tell, the use case is "Someone who wants to use their phone to control the TV instead of the TV remote," which is a tremendous amount of technological overhead for such a negligible benefit.

It's way easier to point your camera at the screen and do an instant sign-in on the TV than it is to get your phone connected to the right Wi-Fi network and cast to the right TV, so the use case would have to be pretty compelling to make up for what a pain in the a** it is when it works, much less when it doesn't.

Major correction here: about something that I have tried to use on many, many occasions, but never used successfully. There's a difference.

You won't read or engage further because you don't actually know any compelling reason to use it. If you did, you would have said what that reason was by now.

Not really, no. If I wanted to use the TV to do all of the networking and playback, I would have just used the TV's app to do it. The number of hotels I've seen where the TV supported Chromecast or AirPlay streaming but did not have a built-in Netflix app are literally zero.

From my perspective, casting is a complete disaster by its very nature. It relies on the display device having full Internet access, which isn't a given. Literally every time I've wanted to do casting, it has been because the TV set's Netflix app wasn't working because of a network problem, and it couldn't get access to the Internet, so I was trying to use the phone's network connection. By shifting the network connectivity back to the TV set, it makes the entire system completely worthless, because the exact situations where it could be useful are the exact situations where it isn't.

I think their initial idea to use human brains to run aspects of AI was far smarter and more realistic than their quick jump to human batteries!
Sometimes the audience doesn't need to all understand the whole story; we try too hard to appease the lowest common denominator. It was such a stupid brushed over explanation, that I just assumed it was metaphorical rather than be too annoyed they didn't try harder and just confuse half the viewers instead of BS something that was actually confusing to most everybody outside of metaphors or the usual unimportant filler that really could just be skipped.
You don't need to know WHY Luke and Leia were siblings, WHY the politics created the conflict, WHY some people had magical powers, etc. Those details were unnecessary and their later detailing was not interesting so a lot of entertainment had to be invented around a dull cameo like appearance which hitched the new money maker to the old success. Now they seem to make even less effort to hitch it together; which is fine because cosplay is enough for most people. I frankly would like a good well made story and don't care what theming is used as long as it doesn't detract from either one... which often it does hack away from the source those hack "artists" depend upon. This is why I see AI as a threat to their livelihood.

I'm not a US lawyer, but I'd interpret that as they need to block commercial VPN services advertised for circumventing blocks.

And then having people check it. The result is every single update can randomly break shit that doesn't get caught.

Having people check the AI code at slop doesn't really work because the entire point of AI coding is to do it fast and cheap so there's going to be enormous pressure to do as little checking as possible.

Not that it matters. Microsoft has a monopoly. Any viable competitor will simply get taken out by well-known and well understood anti-competitive tactics. And because we refuse to enforce those laws because we refuse to vote for politicians who will enforce those laws Microsoft can basically do whatever they want. With the occasional bribe to some of the larger governments that might try to regulate them.

I think Europe is actually trying to quit the habit but I don't think they will be able to. I can tell you right now that there is no alternative for Microsoft Excel when you're doing large complex spreadsheets. Open offices nice but it just doesn't cut it. Some of that's because of shitty little patents Microsoft has but the system is designed to let them keep generating new patents that make it difficult to compete. And some of it is just that it's rough going writing office software so it's tough to compete with someone who can pay people to do that kind of boring dreary work.

And of course you have the aforementioned anti-competitive tactics that work like a charm.

I'm not even going to say we need to decide what's more important, software freedom or whatever bullshit that makes us vote for pro corporate anti-capitalist political candidates (and mark my words pro corporate is just as anti-capitalist as any socialist or communist just in a different direction)

It doesn't matter what the reasons are the end result is we don't enforce laws.

From here in my comfortable chair it's hard to judge how bad the situation is, vs. to what extent it might be a form of protest by somebody who just doesn't like self-driving cars. There has been vandalism and harassment of a few types, from setting them on fire to calling dozens of them to the same place at the same time to cause gridlock. In San Francisco there was a huge flap because a waymo ran over a cat.

Is right wing governments directly interfering with colleges for political reasons.

Critical thinking and right-wing politics do not mix. The core fundamentals of right wing politics are trickle down economics and a blind faith in authority. Hierarchy basically. The idea that there is a natural order with some people at the top, some people in the middle and some people in the bottom.

I can see why this theology would be appealing to some people. It implies that there is an order to the universe and that you have a place in that order. Although I never seem to meet any right wingers who believe their place is at the bottom..

The problem is that in the real world it doesn't work. Trickle down economics is pretty obviously bad news. But granting absolute power to a handful of individuals is equally bad. You would think people who grew up being told about checks and balances would understand that but well, here we are. We still lionize Kings.

Because of that it is absolutely essential that anyone who wants to climb the ranks in the right wing undermines public education. You can't have people getting well educated because they're going to start asking the kind of questions well educated people do. Like, why is America bombing boats in Venezuela or why does the United Kingdom use child protection laws to go after pro Palestinian groups... Oops I just triggered somebody.

OK, it could be argued the government is the problem in the first place, since laws are a big part of why production here is economically nonviable. The problem is how specifically to solve that? Each law is there for a reason. It's easy to dismiss regulation broadly but harder in each given case.

If the US as a whole were a good place for this, a happy market solution would be for Intel to be eaten alive by another American competitor until either regains its competency or goes away. But surely you can see the national security risks of the more likely outcome - our supply depending on potential adversaries, including all the chips in critical infrastructure and defense hardware.

That is the basic problem, they don't. Mass-producing semiconductors in the USA without subsidies is not economically viable. The CHIPS act (or equivalently, tariffs) is an effort to tip the financial scales in favor of maintaining domestic production, for national security (so we can't be "cut off" by other nations). But such a scheme will not work if it is not executed in a financially predictable manner.

Users, customers, and humans are simply Non-playing Characters (NPCs) to almost all Tech companies, dictators and wanna be kings. And to them NPCs simply exist to allow them to win the game with real profit and power and to avoid all the consequences and externalities of all that they do.

Shareholders are the only real characters.

We are all NPCs to someone striving for or who has power.

They have given us a bit of a masterclass in engineering here. Identified a rare but important issue, took decisive action to ensure safety, and engineered a fix very quickly to get the aircraft back into service.

It might be a case of the specific version of software they want to install to fix the issue does not work with older hardware, so any aircraft that are still on it need to up upgraded. It's not uncommon for the hardware upgrade to be cheaper and faster than trying to backport the fix and fully qualify that software, especially as the aircraft can't be used until it is done.

That implies rot from within but this was really just top down Intel firing anyone and everyone in order to make quarterly targets.

That was fine when AMD was struggling but AMD got their shit together in 2017. Intel kept firing people they actually need it all the way up to well, now.

The problem is that your engineers are rotting it's that you don't have them because you fired them. Worse it's not as if you got to assassinate them or anything so they went off and got jobs at your competitors.

This is why Nvidia has always been so strong they hire the hell out of engineers in order to keep them out of the hands of competitors. It's a bit problematic because it's why AMD and Intel have such a hard time competing in the GPU market space. They simply cannot afford to hire enough of the kind of engineers they need. Not with the budget the CEO gives them

The figures can be entirely correct and still the answer can be "no". Why? Because Android might use the Linux kernel, but it isn't really a Linux distro in any meaningful sense of the word. And Steam Deck and Chromebooks *can* have some reasonable facsimile of a Linux development environment, but I'd expect maybe 0.1% of users to actually turn it on.

So most of those folks are Linux "users" in much the same way that TiVo owners were linux "users", i.e. they are using a device that deep down, at a level that the user is unaware of, runs some small subset of what a Linux distro typically contains, with a bunch of stuff on top that they mostly aren't in control over.

It's like calling Mac users UNIX users. It's technically correct — the best kind of correct — but grossly misleading.