This is actually a legitimate solution to some classes of problems - you have an overseer AI for your natural language interface that delegates tasks to subordinate AIs using LLMs tuned for specific tasks.

It's worse than authoritative - it's kissing your ass.

You: "Hey, AI, I think the world is flat and rests on the back of an infinite stack of turtles"

AI: "That's a great, here's how that works: [blather]"

People love having their ass kissed. If you don't have control over your ego, you're going to accept AI hallucinations more readily.

"Brain fry" makes it sound like the workers are failing, but it's not them. There are ways AI can augment your job - I use it as a quick way to search and compile relevant results into something I can use, and occasionally to produce simple snippets of code.

If you're a low-skill coder trying to be an expert because you have AI to 'help', then your manager did an awful job of understanding both AI's capabilities and yours. If you're a high-skill coder and your manager expects 10x the output from you after firing all your supporting coders to be replaced with AI... same deal.

On the other hand, if you're an occasional low/mid skill guy usually working solo like me, AI will make your life a lot easier once you learn to spot the hallucinations.

> All in all, it was just ...so american.

My father often said that if you want tits and explosions to watch with your brain turned off, you watch American. If you want something that doesn't spoon feed you, watch British. If you want to commit suicide, watch something Scandinavian.

Things have evolved a bit since those days, but it's not the worst general rule to start with.

And that the 'Newtonian' physics of Gravity wasn't.

I'm a huge buzzkill. I can watch Pacific Rim with a smile on my face, but tell me you've made something realistic when you haven't and it nukes suspension of disbelief for me completely.

For attracting venture capital, about 10 years ago.

Every time Hollywood sells a movie as 'realistic', it's turned out to be bullshit. The trade mags and entertainment reporters repeat the lie, but that doesn't make it true.

I'll be watching this movie soon, it looks fun. I will not expect them to get physics anywhere close to correct enough that someone with a decent high school physics class under their belt won't see where they got it wrong.

I just bought a new fridge. I really would have liked a big tablet on the front and the interior camera to play with... but the manufacturers insist on using their custom Android you can't do much with, and it must always spy on you and feed you ads.

So my new fridge was a lot less expensive and doesn't have a built-in screen.

"Inventory says we should have 92 antiprotons, but I keep counting 91".

"Keep looking!"

A little computer with Mint on it does a great job accessing streaming as well as my NAS. And it doesn't report my activities to anyone.

Black holes can evaporate via some weird physics (and Stephen Hawkings' pop explanation is apparently wrong even as a simplification and he knew it...), but normal physical processes do not apply.

A black hole can't break apart. Any energy you add to the black hole to attempt it would only make the black hole gain mass.

I'm guessing:

1) The cloud of material surrounding the black hole normalizes over time just like a planetary disk. At some point, pretty much everything that can intersect with the black hole already has, and only random collisions create new infalling material.

2) When the black hole does feed, it produces a lot of high energy activity just beyond the event horizon, which pushes material away before it can cross.

It's really nice to have what is basically the world's most awesome anti-aliasing / magical magnification application there is.

The problem is that you cannot extract more information than there was in the source data, so when you add detail you are literally adding it (not recovering it). When AI adds detail, it can do some amazing things... but it can also hallucinate or average things towards a blend of its relevant training data.

It's a cheap shortcut that is unnecessary for most people and for the people who really care... it's offensively inferior.

If they cared about bots, there are several obvious currently active bot campaigns right now that are actively supported by subreddits' moderators. You just have to have the right audience that the wrong people want to influence and sit back.

Reddit only cares about bots when it doesn't result in them getting a piece of the action, or worse, where it drives their own action away. When it profits them, they support the bot problem with deliberate indifference, and this has always been their core philosophy even for things like child porn - until it became front page news, they had a LOT of underage nudity forums and massive amounts of activity in them.

There isn't really a profitable way to ethically run a social media site. You still need too many professional human moderators to control the bad actors who will endlessly abuse your forum if it has enough traffic that you'll lose money trying to 'do it right'.

Trump is not just threatening Canada economically, he's actively taking steps to destroy Canada's auto sector.

Why Canada should tie itself to an American industry that is actively hostile to innovation and increases prices for Canadians, while the US itself is hostile to Canada is beyond me.

Buy Chinese... better, more appropriate options and you're not giving money to a country that wants to annex you. When the US sorts its shit out, the auto industry can try and win the market back.