I get not needing it or wanting it. But why is hitting Netflix in the pocket book on your list of benefits?

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.

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.

When people discover that a whole class of incoming folks can't find their way to anything where the path isn't a straight line, we might see a surge in reverse ageism.

That wasn't *all* I said, but it is apparently as far as you read. But let's stay there for now. You apparently disagree with this, whnich means that you think that LLMs are the only kind of AI that there is, and that language models can be trained to do things like design rocket engines.

Interesting that the "EMI hardening" is a software/firmware error correction feature and not a physical shielding around the hardware like on military planes.

That's what I just said.

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

Given, the Soviet-Russian style of space technology has always been more pragmatic. But this looks rickety and somewhat ghetto-style, like deterioration by neglegt. Or they used chinesium for the structure and it failed before EOL.

However, it could also very well be that they've been using those exact same folding gantries for decades beyond EOL now and the finally simply failed due to wear and tear, no matter how rugged they initially were built.

It's probably a combination of both.

It would be absolutely hilarious if they can repair this russian-Soyuz style with a crew of welders and junk from a scrapyard in two weeks or so, spec-ing be damned. I wouldn't be surprised if exactly that happens. LOL!

... has to be just about undisputed #1 of nightmare material. Think Warhammer 40k but IRL.Basically the exact opposite of the Ian Banks culture. Imagine a fanatic revengeful god the l00nies can actually talk to and get new mayhem instructions from. Really malicious ones at that.

Yippee, nice times ahead.

No wonder the experts are warning us left, right and center.

What if it's a girl, my Lord, in a flat-bed Ford?

Mmm, I,'d call them adrenaline junkies. Not an optimist here. ;-)

>"we've got a new social norm. It's illegal for tech companies to give unsupervised access to social media. Have you been paying attention at all?"

1) It shouldn't be up to the "social media" companies.
2) They have no way of determining if someone is a minor other than to strip ALL people of their privacy.
3) That isn't a "social norm", it is just a law. Big difference.
4) And the "social norm" should be no unrestricted access to the Internet at all, not just so-called "social media." There are MILLIONS of other sites children should not interact with.
5) There is no good definition of "social media", so they are just listing some of the popular ones.

This doesn't solve all the problems, and in the process, it makes new ones that are just as bad- penalizing adults is one of them.

>"So you're saying the restrictions need to be stronger to capture some of that other 99%? Or were you planning on banning phones and computers themselves?"

We are talking about minors. They shouldn't have unsupervised access to unrestricted devices connected to the Internet. I am not saying we ban anything for adults. But children should not have access to things that are dangerous. And that isn't up to companies or government, but to parents and their agents. We need to set a new social norm that it is not OK to just give unrestricted devices to minors. Just like it is not OK to give them unrestricted access to knives, medications, alcohol, strangers, vehicles, junk food, etc. That should NOT involve "ID"'ing everyone for every web site.

Here's where the summary goes wrong:

Artificial Intelligence is in fact many kinds of technologies. People conflate LLMs with the whole thing because its the first kind of AI that an average person with no technical knowledge could use after a fashion.

But nobody is going to design a new rocket engine in ChatGPT. They're going to use some other kind of AI that work on problems on processes that the average person can't even conceive of -- like design optimization where there are potentially hundreds of parameters to tweak. Some of the underlying technology may have similarities -- like "neural nets" , which are just collections of mathematical matrices that encoded likelihoods underneath, not realistic models of biological neural systems. It shouldn't be surprising that a collection of matrices containing parameters describing weighted relations between features should have a wide variety of applications. That's just math; it's just sexier to call it "AI".