Comment Re:price (Score 1) 17
Huawei is one of the few vendors that supplies source code for security review (under NDA).
Do they also provide build tools and allow customers to build and install their own images?
Huawei is one of the few vendors that supplies source code for security review (under NDA).
Do they also provide build tools and allow customers to build and install their own images?
You have to have punishments to stop the people who are stopped by the threat of them. Those people do exist. We don't think about them much because the existing deterrents work just fine on them.
But you also shouldn't waste your time either believing that they will deter everyone, nor that stronger punishments will deter statistically more people. There are always those who think they won't get caught, and those who don't care.
Somehow authoritarians always forget the carrot. The stick isn't invalid, it just isn't a complete solution, and you shouldn't be rushing to apply it in all situations.
I would rather live off the land in the wilderness and avoid civilization altogether
What's stopping you? There's definitely people doing this right now. Around a quarter of the continental US is BLM land. Last I looked pig tags were free.
We'll sneak some probes in to do real exploring.
...naming it after an irate puppy killer.
They should try something incremental rather than target proverbial moon-shots first. That way the investments are less risky. Their egos seem to want showy shit ASAP, no wonder they get along with the tinted person.
What you call destruction of service jobs, I would call the introduction to the age of plenty, and the end of the age of scarcity. There shouldn't be an "upheaval", but I know there will be. The haves are too good at dividing the have nots for them to stop.
You debunked your own comment, there's nothing for me to do here
Some ask "If the market is good at deciding how to pay people based on the value they can produce why are these non-producers making a very large chunk of all the money out there?"
However, most people who ask that do it while pointing to people who are actually quite important producers, such as financiers. Be careful not to conflate "don't produce anything of value" with "do something I don't understand the importance of".
Of course there are people in every profession who get paid a lot more than they're worth. This is less true of manual labor jobs where the output is easy to see and measure, but it's true across the board. Even in manual labor jobs you can have people whose output is negative. They may pick X apples or whatever, but they might do it while making everyone around them work slower.
IIRC in legal theory for liability, they call this the "empty chair" tactic. Where each defendant points to an "empty chair" aka, a party not involved in the dispute and lays culpability to this non-party. If everyone confront then points to the "empty chair" they can shirk responsibility.
Just to complete the description of the "empty chair" tactic, this is why lawsuits typically name anyone and everyone who might possibly be blamed, including many who clearly aren't culpable. It's not because the plaintiff or the plaintiff's attorney actually thinks all of those extra targets really might be liable, it's so that the culpable parties can't try to shift the blame to an empty chair, forcing the plaintiff to explain why the empty chair isn't culpable (i.e., defend them). Of course this means that those clearly non-culpable parties might have to defend themselves, which sucks for them.
Take a look at the size of Wikipedia's bank account. They constantly continue to solicit for funds as though they're desperate for funds on their site despite having billions upon billions of funds, enough to last pretty much off of the interest alone.
Work in AI, eh?
So... you didn't actually look at the size of WikiMedia Foundation's bank account.
WikiMedia absolutely has enough money to run Wikipedia indefinitely if they treated their current pile of money as an endowment and just used the income from it to support the site. They don't have "billions upon billions", but they do have almost $300M, and they spend about $3M per year on hosting, and probably about that much again on technical staff to run the site, so about $6M per year. That's 2% per year. Assuming they can get a 6% average return on their assets, they can fully fund Wikipedia forever, and then some.
So, what do they do with all of the donations instead, if the money isn't needed to run Wikipedia? It funds the foundation's grant programs. Of course, you might actually like their grant programs. I think some of their grants are great, myself, and if they were honest about what they're using it for I might be inclined to give. But they're not, and the fact that they continue lying to Wikipedia's user base really pisses me off, so I don't give and I strongly discourage everyone I can from giving, at every opportunity.
(a) I did that fine previously without AI
Me too, but it took a lot longer and I was a lot less thorough. I would skim a half-dozen links from the search result, the LLM reads a lot more, and a lot more thoroughly.
(b) Nobody is following any of the links that supposedly support the conclusions of the AI; nobody is reading any source material, they just believe whatever the AI says
I do. I tell the LLM to always include links to its sources, and I check them. Not all of them, but enough to make sure the LLM is accurately representing them. Granted that other people might not do this, but those other people also wouldn't check more than the first hit from the search engine, which is basically the same problem. If you only read the top hit, you're trusting the search engine's ranking algorithm.
into AI-generated slop, such that (d) Humans can no longer access original, correct information sources. It is becoming impossible.
That seems like a potential risk. I have't actually seen that happening in any of the stuff I've looked at.
adverts allready have,
Adverts pay for the web. And also clutter it up. Both of these things are true. Without advertising, there would be very little content that isn't paywalled, and there would be far less content than there is. Slashdot wouldn't exist, for example. The key is to keep advertising sufficiently profitable that it can fund the web, but not so intrusive that it make the web awful.
How do we do that? The best idea I've seen is to use adblockers that selectively block the obnoxious ads. But not enough people do it, so that doesn't work either.
China disagrees.
[...]
Or is there something I'm missing?
What you're missing, as usual, is that IT DOESN'T EXIST YET but you're claiming that it does, as usual.
The source code is written in assembly
FTFS, "it's the first version of UNIX in which the kernel and some of the core utilities were rewritten in the new C programming language"
Put this source code in front of 99.9% of the people here on Slashdot and they'd be able to do nothing with it.
Yes, this place really has gone to shit.
Some of the technologies that would enable space exploration could also help us with the goal of repairing our biosphere though.
Yes, but we could also develop the same technologies and then not spend the money going to space, and instead implement them here, and think about space exploration once we're sure we have a future.
Well, if power hungry people didn't mid perfectly reasonable posts down, simply because they disagree, nobody would have to post as AC.
People do it to me constantly (a day without a 3-5 comment serial downmod is unusual) and I don't have to post AC to keep my Karma in the excellent range.
You will never amount to much. -- Munich Schoolmaster, to Albert Einstein, age 10