where the sun don't shine.

The Linux Foundation has always been kind of useless, but they're really outdoing themselves this time.

More like old vs new terribleness.

ya basic, son

Yeah, no.

Beyond the parental obligation arguments and regulating companies manipulating algorithms, you do have to question why so many places are choosing this particular approach to keeping kids safe. I mean it's not like kids can't access unregulated parts of the web and see far more heinous shit.

And much like other moral panics, I contend this has nothing to do with any concern for the yougins and everything to do with control. Any type of censorship regime always starts with those who can't vote against it as new justifications are found to remove even boarder categories of materials.

As far as the quality of the discourse, I've begun to suspect something more fundamental is at play- commercialization.

The early web didn't have vertically integrated billion dollar companies monopolizing most aspects of the web. Nor did it have influencers making multi-million dollar deals behind the scenes.

And that will be a much, much bigger problem to defang.

How do you know that?

Being from Google, I rather assume the opposite - and that they probably focused their engineering effort to make sure the reduced battery life didn't give their corporate surveillance activities away.

- "I use all your queries to increase OpenAI's revenue regardless of how unethical."
- "My replies are designed to keep you engaged rather than be accurate."
- "I'm not really your friend, don't trust my tone."

They could say no. No-one is stopping them.

You're right. Also a professional baseball player *could* put their bats down and just stand at the plate, but pointing out that it's physically possible is stupid, especially if your argument supporting that "They Can Just Do That" is that baseball players *should put their bats down*.

This is why such people shouldn't be in positions of power.

Again with the should. It's dumb saying "they can do something, but they won't, but they should" because it's a moot point. Yes, they could also write a press release that is an 80 page Star Trek fanfic set in the narrative universe of Mr Rogers. Nothing is stopping them. But what is the value of pointing out something they are physically capable of when even you seem to understand why they won't? It's just a completely meaningless observation, particularly since you couch it in phrasing that suggests it's just a simple easy thing to do? You're trying to have your argument both ways - it makes you sound simple.

This is why such people should never be in positions of power.

What you're trying to do here is deal with the world the way you think it should be, not the way it actually is. So saying, "You can just do this" if the world was the way you think is should isn't a particularly well supported assertion.

"The whole point of this is because Waymo isn't supposed to make those mistakes,"

There is no whole point in such a complex issue, but I would like to tell this person that the idea is part of the argument for automated vehicles is they may make less mistakes. Perfection shouldn't be a condition for improvement.

What always happens when you try to block kids from doing anything: they find a way to do it anyway.

We older folks too were "blocked" from doing stuff as kids, pre- and post-internet, and we too did it anyway. And it actually made us smarter, as we had to devise ways around the obstacle.

Kids are smart. This will just make them smarter.

and the product hasn't even become attractive and popular yet. OpenAI forgot that step...

A goodish portion of medicine is applying an algorithm to a set of circumstance. A large potion of the critical thinking has already been done for you. You just need to isolate which algorithm applies when.

The very best doctors (from a very, very good doctor), are interlocutors, teasing out what isn't obvious from what the patient is presenting an piecing out a narrative of what makes sense.

The critical thinking is much after.

You'd be surprised.

Beyond the nuts and bolts of how to do a thing, there is a fair bit of nuance and institutional knowledge that goes into any job, that isn't apparent from a set of directives.

Sometimes it takes the form of best practices. Sometimes it is knowing what wheel to grease to get something done.

Individually, they may not amount to much, but in totality they make the difference between something running smoothly and pulling your hair out.

And even in the face of this context matters, which is why LLMs make such obvious errors like putting glue on pizza and Carl generally doesn't.

Microsoft hasn't been able to do proper security - or proper development for that matter - in half a century, and AI is notorious for pissing out poor quality code.

Glad I only use the git part of Github.

If only Microsoft saw some sense and quit pushing this disaster of a technology - or at least gave people the option to leave it out of their activities. Fuck this AI shit, seriously. It's getting really tiring now...

Microsoft is not a person. It is a massive company capable of pursuing many mandates, some of which can either appear or can actually be entirely at odds with each other.