The problem is people making stupid automated processes. Another example from the Netherlands, this not even AI related but merely OCR, man receives 15 incorrect fines because the computer (automated scanning using a vehicle mounted camera) reads a numberplate with an X that has a dent in it as a K, and then looks up the numberplate, sees it has no parking validation and automatically writes a fine. And you have to appeal every fine. And the camera keeps reading the wrong letter and keeps sending new fines.
This is distopia.

By the way: we were promised by Amsterdam that every fine would be processed by a human. Guess they lied.

What is the minimum time I can put on the refresh?

The rub is that Microsoft pushed an update without checking the glib version and people on Ubuntu 18.04 stupid enough to install the update were screwed. I don't think the problem is that Microsoft is updating VS with new versions. But then do not update people on systems that you (have to) know are incompatible with the new version. Leave them on the old version. Yes, running an unsupported OS with unsupported software is a thing. We are not all corporate people willing (or needing) the latest version of everything.

He is not right. This is about a Samsung phone that took an image of a blurry picture of the moon, then went online and presented it as a very crisp picture of the moon. That is fake. Then saying "well, every picture is fake" shows a total lack of understanding of the problem. That is something completely different and unrelated to how you present the raw image from the imaging sensor. And then still: you can show the raw image. If you say that is not a real picture then we should ask ourselfs if grass is really green.

And dropped support for its Teams communications app for Linux.

I was more thinking of Playboy TV and Hustler TV at the same time. Also for reasons.

and glue it to my screen. So I don't fall into the problem of having my

be stolen online.

If you have to pay a lot to feed back into the grid, then you limit the amount of energy flowing back. That seems common sense to me. Let the solar panels produce just the right amount that you need.
Agreed, during the night the energy needs to come from somewhere else. Either conventional power plants that now need to get their install costs back over less production time (incurring higher costs), or with a home battery. I don't know about you, but in summer, when I'm not heating, a 10 kWh battery is sufficient for the night. And my solar panels will produce that on an average day.

When we're talking about 30k$ for a solar installation, you're getting about 30 kWp for that over here. That will produce up to 195 kWh of energy in a single day, during peak solar days. And it will do the 10 kWh you need to charge your battery probably 85% of the year. It's better to budget 5k$ for the battery and a little less for the solar
Or are solar prices a lot higher in the US?

But this is going to be the future. This is how the safety industry works. It is safer so it has to be implemented and no one can give an argument why it shouldn't because then you are against safety. And once it is implented, it will never be reversed.
Every measure associated with safety is implemented like that.

Ok, for your sake, should I have written "agree or disagree"? I honestly do not understand what you are whining about.

That you only read the summary does not mean I only read the summary, so any assumption you make about me not understanding what it is about is your assumption and may be as far from the truth as grass is blue. And then you want to attack me for not understanding what it is about? No, that does not fly.

You assumed that I did not know what happened. You assumed I only read the /. summary. I am now assuming that you tell everybody they don't know what happened. It's right there

You do not know what happened

You never mentioned it was the /. summary. Do we have to infer that or is that just an uninformed guess?
Are you one of those that only read the /. summary? Don't follow the links? Why do you assume I do the same? The links are there for a reason. Click them. Read the articles that they link. Maybe you can't read the german articles, others can and will. Then tell others they're not informed. Well, you don't know how informed I am, it is just your assumption because you apparently don't want to read further than the summary and assume no one else does.
I'm sorry, but it is not me you should correct, it is yourself.

Which summary? The one from /.? The one from The Register? The report from heise? The discussion at wortfilter.de? The section of the law he was charged with?
If you really do want to accuse me of not knowing what to agree or disagree on, then at least specify what I am not disagreeing on. Because at the moment I'm having a hard time deciding if I agree with your comment or not. Because I really don't know what you are trying to say.

Wow. You think you put the caveat so you won't get thumped "because you agree with it", but in stead you get thumped "because you don't know wat is happening".
Classy.