Dibs on "Donaldian Decadence".

If the YOB implodes soon enough, then we can hope that 2025 goes down in history as "The Year of Donaldian Decadence".

#DonaldianDecadence

Or what's your better historical label for what happened?

In this case, I mean literally... literally. You can find citations trivially. Everyone should know this by now. If you want to talk about Nazis, you should know something about Nazis.

"Remember, Na-Zi means National SOCIALIST, and that's that fascism is."

Remember, the Nazis literally called themselves socialists to fool stupid people, and you also don't know what either socialism or fascism is if you think one is a type of the other.

He wasn't a Nazi but George Washington did a genocide and was named "Town Killer" for it. And before someone points out that was his father, no, his father (who was also named George) ALSO did a genocide and was called the same thing for the same reason.

NT existed when IBM brought out at least two major versions of OS/2 without such features while NT had them, so... No.

Provocative FP, but I think you're mostly wrong and lacking in the kind of insight that will lead towards any solution. Most obviously, the Democrats are not going to solve anything. I think we are actually in a situation where too much change has become a key problem, so controlling and even limiting the changes are crucial. I sort of hate to say it, but I think the Amish may have it right when they consider newfangled ideas carefully before adopting them. (The Amish religious stuff mostly seems bogus, however...)

As regards the monopoly problem, I think the best solution approach might be a progressive tax on profits where higher degrees of monopolization result in higher taxes on the associated profits. The "natural" path to higher retained earnings would then be for the monopolist to divide itself into honest competitors. Three metrics (plus your ideas) could be used to detect the monopoly: (1) Limited customer choice and too few meaningful options, (2) Inability of wannabe competitors to enter the monopoly niche, and (3) Lack of alternative employment options for people working in the niche. But "We can't get there from here." Certainly there are no politicians who are trying to lead in such a direction.

Returning to this story I think the actual key is in the deltas. Yes, Amazon does need engineers, but profit maximization calls for keeping ONLY the engineers who can produce the highest rates of profit increase. All less productive engineers are just slowing things down. The delusion that Amazon is now suffering from is an idea that AI (and related IT) can be used to replicate the work of the delta-maximizers all over the place.

The reality is different and I expect to be amused by the implosion--even though I will also probably suffer from some of the collateral damage.

No, but it would let people who care know, and it would let people who potentially care google and find out.

I would tend to assume that if you pay you get more, so it's just a trial version, and this is just an indirect slashvertisement.

I don't think creating a centralized world ID database is going to be a win at this point.

OS/2 had no security features needed for multiuser support. It might as well have been classic MacOS. Citrix had a multiuser version of OS/2 with security tacked on, but it wasn't a realistic solution and was never popular. Building an OS without security was the moronic decision that killed it. Plus IBM never did anything meaningful to promote it so nobody cared. That it was used anywhere (especially in ATMs) was a horrible decision itself because of the lack of security features and has created untold woes. Maybe nobody ever got fired because they bought IBM, but they should have.

It's wrong. The processor has a feature. People will reasonably assume they can use that feature. Then they find out it's disabled.

If that declaration is not in the largest font size used in the materials then it's hidden.

Requoted against the censor trolls with mod points. I should ditto several following related comments, but Slashdot isn't worth that much effort these years.

My top candidates just now:

1. It's just a joke.

2. I'm just asking questions. (Most relevant to this story.)

3. AI is good.

So what's your favorite?

In my typically verbose way, I feel like a few words of clarification are called for. Also another attempted joke or two?

The first one is mostly frequently abused as an excuse for bad behavior, including speech behaviors. In particular, there are many lies that used to be taken as proof of character flaws, but now they are just spun away. In orange particular, "The president was only joking" is no excuse for a job that ain't supposed to be so funny it makes you sick. (Which actually comes back to the theme of the Slashdot story at hand.)

The second one is most damaging as an epistemological attack on the nature of truth itself. It's actually a good thing that science does ask questions, but the goal of scientific questions is to learn more, not to destroy the idea that we know anything at all. Perfect knowledge should not be the ultimate enemy of trying to learn anything at all on the excuse that our knowledge ain't perfect. As if there were any perfect scientists (or politicians), now or ever.

Now about my newish third candidate, the problem is with "good". Options that are closer to the truth might be "AI is a tool too easily used as a weapon" or even "AI is nothing" because it's the human beings who use things, even including AI things.

Just had another encounter with an AI entrepreneur yesterday. Language-related application should have caught my interest, but his money-centric attitude lost it. My bad. What else should I have expected at a VC gathering? The main reason he was there was in hopes of getting some of that sweet, sweet cash and I should congratulate him on his tight focus. (A-hole joke time?)

Back to the AI threat. I suppose the main angle for this story should be examples of AI slop attacking vaccines in particular and the CDC in general. Too depressing to websearch for some examples, and you can get AI help if you want some. I'm more focused on the GAIvatar threat. I considered "GAIvatar are harmless" as my third candidate, but the portmanteau is not frequent and I've been unable to find any standard usage describing generative AI used to imitate specific people. Rarely they may offer a few bits about chatting with a fake Einstein or an AI ghost of a grandparent. Recently read an interesting SF story about solving a major math conjecture with the aid of an AI postmortem copy of a deceased father...

So I used to focus on the use of individual GAIvatars to predict and control individuals (though carefully crafted and targeted prompts). But now I'm wondering about creating a group GAIvator to predict and control the behaviors of an entire class of people. It could even become a kind of circular definition, where group membership is defined on a sliding scale based on how closely a particular candidate member conforms to the GAIvator's predictions and prompts.

So have a nice Friday?

Me? I'll take my chances with the vaccines. Much better odds than they'll give me in Vegas or the stock market.

Yeah, that was a big goof, thanks for understanding.

Apple is capable of hiring talented people and creating a useful product. They just don't seem to be capable of being user-friendly in the ways that matter to me. TBH they were never great at it, and MUGs did the heavy lifting in the customer relations department for them for free. Anyway I'm totally capable of believing their performance claims, to a reasonable point, especially when the results aren't putting them first.

I wish they were friendlier, because their hardware is reasonably impressive. I'm also just not in their target demographic apparently because I'd rather have a slightly thicker device with better cooling and battery capacity.

Also to Doc Holliday.