I think a hog in a trough would work.

I believe it was Joseph Stalin who said that quantity has its own quality (in regards to the T-34 tank).

Like the T-34, these enshittified tech products leave a trail of destroyed industries, collapsed societies, and scorched earth.

Just because there are people available to work that doesn't mean they will be hired. And they won't be hired because of AI.

If the GOP continues to run the government the old people won't be a problem either because they will die when they lose health coverage.

Creating icons in the game is part of creating the game. You just said it wasn't used for that and then said it was used for that.

"I'm against AI slop as much as anyone, and in general a fan of regulation, but this really is something that should be solved by the market. If people don't want AI slop, let them not buy it"

This isn't about the slop. If you're a fan of regulation, and saving jobs isn't a good enough reason for you, wait you're not actually a fan.

My local supermarkets, at least the ones where I shop, don't allow purchases with credit. This is irritating AF even though I have the money in the bank because I get a percentage back.

Right, it's going to take Jihad.

False. Free Market is only one kind of Capitalism. Further, there has never actually been a free market of any significant size. It's an ideal which can only be approached, and ironically, it requires regulation to do so.

It's a bit comforting that a rich tech CEO has such thoughts, but it's also very unsettling that he seems to find those thoughts rather novel and devoid of any emotional connection.

"Gee, there's something wrong with this, and something very dangerous - let's set it loose on the world and deploy it widely while we're still experimenting with it!" said no sensible and caring human being, ever.

And if intelligent humans were the only ones holding political power, managing infrastructure, litigating court cases, writing computer programs, etc, then we'd be fine. So obviously, we're not fine.

LLMs can do it faster and more effectively. Even now, in many cases they can do it more convincingly. Saying that LLMs don't increase the scope and effectiveness of propaganda is like saying that nuclear warheads don't increase the scope and effectiveness of military actions. The latter of which, by the way, are also likely to be 'enhanced' by LLM capabilities.

IANAP so my impressions may be way off base. That said, I've read a lot of, er... let's call it "enthusing" about Rust lately. And all of it seems to be of the "ZOMG! Rust!" variety that somehow makes me think of ponies.

I have no doubt that Rust is a decent language that solves real problems, and anything that disarms memory-usage footguns is worth looking at. But is it really worthy of the hype I keep reading? Or is it just a lot of programmers who don't know much of anything other than Rust and are pushing for wider adoption to ensure job security?

When you get control of the money, you get control of the means of production. That's literally what capitalism is for.

Cursive is shit though and people should stop using it. If we're only keeping it around for signatures we should just learn to accept doing them without. They can learn fine motor skills in an art class.

Communications development.

If it doesn't have military applications then it doesn't get funded.

Keeping it going costs peanuts compared to the PR.