I think that it does, because most people in history bought a PC from an OEM, and the rest of us could get an OEM copy if we wanted to. Having been a Mac user up into the 040 days, and then slightly again after that, I did always appreciate the fact that Apple wouldn't even in theory hassle you about making your own copies of the System disks. But: Apple wasn't giving you anything that it didn't make sense for them to give you, and they for most of history they've charged a substantial price premium and provided inferior performance. Even today, when they actually have impressive hardware for a time longer than the moment the G5 had in the sun, they still only excel up into the mid-range, but I have to admit they're killing it there.

I paid $100 for the last version of Windows I bought (the absolutely peak Windows 7 Pro x64, for what it's worth) and I got a legit system builder's license as I was building a potato of Theseus which has evolved into the big black cube-shaped 5900X I'm using now. I could run that Windows 7 in a VM today if I want to, and I occasionally do when I need to run some kind of programmer or something — just attach a hub to the VM to solve all the awkwardness. But I haven't run either Windows or MacOS except under protest since I discovered AmigaOS and Unix at nearly the same time, in 1991.

It seems to me that there is a general lack of sanity in the world. This is only one of the most personally irritating personifications.

That's fair in general, but that still doesn't mean that you should chase every CVE immediately... I know, see above

Both things

My favorite is the times it's told people to make a right angle turn off the side of a bridge. That's not an instruction very likely to cause harm because there's not an exit there for some idiot to take, but it's especially hilarious because there's no excuse for that.

PS2s didn't come with HDDs so devs couldn't rationally require one.

Most games after that install

Are you trying to sound like geekmux or did you forget not to?

This isn't helping. If you can offer information of specific substantive value that is relevant to this I would still love to hear it.. I have zero clue what you are talking about or trying to say. What legal decisions? What illegal actions? How specifically do you believe they are relevant to an administration attempting to enforce laws that don't exist?

Of course the law matters. What is that supposed to mean? What are you talking about? How specifically do you expect to get a conviction in an article III court of something that isn't even illegal?

Subsidized or not Chinese companies releasing these models are comically small compared to their US analogues. US AI firms are screwed either way.

Did you even bother to read what was stated before smashing submit? Who was talking about knowing "how to do it" or when AGI is "happening"? My only point was more data is not necessary to achieve AGI.

This is wrong. LLMs are terrible at citation. The whole utility of the technology is its ability to generalize not find where to "look".

Who was saying anything about any of this?

On what legal basis / authority can such usage be disallowed?

It's hard to get that evidence, which was the point of creating a coin to profit from the presidency.

If I accept a cookie from a customer I can be cashiered, but if the president sets up an entire automated bribery SYSTEM you will make excuses for him

Die mad, cucks

Trump has no such authority neither is there any feasible way to stop it.

Availability of data is most likely hindering pursuit of AGI. Even three years ago human perplexity scores were easily an order of magnitude worse than AI models at the time. It is an incontrovertible fact more data is not necessary to achieve AGI. If the only way people see to get improvements is more data than having more data just encourages pursuit of a dead end.