You could break shopping out to yet-another device, but generally speaking you don't need to.

Services like paypal help you protect your credit card number. And also, even if you do get your credit card stolen, you can just dispute the charges and get the money back. If this happens a lot that's a problem of course, but the industry is built to tolerate this level of crime so long as it isn't excessive.

It helps if you do things like clear you cookies every time you close the browser, so session hijacking is a lot harder. But this is not very convenient. You could maybe do all your shopping on one browser that clears cookies and other web browsing on another.

No solution is perfect, it's all a matter of finding your right balance. But maximum vulnerability to hackers probably isn't it.

You load 16 tons, how do you feel? Too tired to work and too scared to steal.

I expect that colleges have seen a significant reduction in the number of students enrolling in Computer Science and Software Engineering programs, because AI has scared the students away.

Colleges want that enrollment money. They have already been watering down the curriculum year-after-year so that the difficulty would stop scaring potential students away (the fact that many of their graduates couldn't code themselves out of a brown paper bag notwithstanding). So now they are just continuing that process, looking at a way to promise "something relevant" to get students continuing to enroll.

So this statement is really just advertising. They are trying to align with what young people are thinking and expecting, so they can get the enrollment money from them. Whether it is true or not really doesn't matter. It's just marketing.

This is why people should practice "device segregation" if they can afford to do so.

It means you have one computer that you use for online banking, investing, and tax filing.

A separate computer is for gaming, shopping, and browsing online.

This way, even if you get hacked though the sorts of risky activities that involve installing a lot of software that runs locally, and roaming around the open internet, the hackers won't steal anything related to your nest egg. Or your social security number.

The good news here is you can do online banking, investing, and tax filing on a low-powered laptop, so it doesn't need to be pricy.

Does Amazon pay more than its competitors?

Between this and the mandatory RTO policy, I am having a hard time understanding how Amazon manages to retain top tier talent.

countdown to the irrelevance of humanity.

Who says humanity was ever relevant to anything? We are just a bunch of ugly bags of mostly water on a little micro-planet out in the backwaters of the galaxy.

So we can use computers to create art instead of creating it manually. Does that somehow rob us of an existential purpose that we previously had?

No. We are perhaps making human creators irrelevant as laborers (irrelevant, that is, to us), but that really isn't much of a change from a big-picture perspective. Maybe our economic models will change a bit. Maybe the rich/poor divide will worsen. For the most part, that's all just the same lyrics sung to a slightly different tune.

if they were actually mining bitcoins or something, then at least the environmental cost would have some sort of useful return.

Oh man, why didn't that post get +5 Funny?

So what? Apparently no one else thought to use this solution for this problem until Xe Iaso came along.

I, for one, think this is awesome, and I am happy she made it. Maybe there will be an arms race. Well, in that case, I am glad she is on our side.

My hat is off to you, Xe Iaso.

Another one using ChatGPT to write book is nothing new.

I would say it is "the new normal." Including the bit where AI use is not disclosed even though disclosure is mandatory.

Your neighbors leave dead things on your stoop?

I would call the cops.

"It's a trap!"

The quality level that you are talking about is not merely a matter of skill on the part of the developer, but also time. The formal methods used that produce that level of performance and perfection take a long time to apply, no matter how good one is.

The *primary* reason why most software doesn't perform at that level is this: time costs money. Software that is thrown together quickly, and as a result has bugs, will be available for purchase much sooner, and will cost far less (mainly because it cost far less to develop). People are willing to buy buggy software if it is going to save them a fortune.

For most applications, the level of perfection that you are talking about is simply not necessary. People don't need their software to be that perfect in order to do their jobs. Of course, too MANY bugs will be ruinous, so there is a sweet spot to find.

And that's my main point: there is a sweet spot, and for MOST (not all) software applications, it is nowhere near as high as what you are talking about. Therefore, there is no market for top quality software. Any business that tries to aim for that quality level will price themselves right out of the market and go bust before they even get their first product out the door.

So, don't blame the developers. They are simply doing what the market is paying them to do.

Life is competitive, and always has been. And nobody owes you a job.

Tech changes over time and everyone must adapt to it. That's going to put some people out of work. It's not a happy moment for them, but seriously, that's is how it has always been.

There is this nice theory that, by working together, we can all make sure everyone has enough without ever facing the horror of being put out of a job and needing to take unpleasant work to earn a living. Well, human nature doesn't really make this tenable, which is why it consistently fails when it is attempted.

For now, the essential survival strategy is the same as it has been for millions of years: adapt or die.

I am sorry if this news makes you unhappy. But that doesn't make me (or anyone else who understands this) a jackass. We are just adapting like everyone else.

Apple is not a completely closed ecosystem. You can use a Dell keyboard and a Logitech mouse with your Mac Mini, for example. There are legal battles being fought right now to make it even more open.

You have no basis whatsoever for your prediction "If Nintendo was open back in the day, they would not be the Nintendo we know now." That statement is based on nothing but pure imagination.

Open ecosystems provide consumers with more choices. That is an awesome benefit! I like the option to use Dell keyboards and Logitech mice with my Mac Mini. And I would like the option to use other-branded docks and/or converters with my Nintendo Switch 2 as well. It would sure be nice to be able to plug an XReal headset directly into a Nintendo Switch 2 for example. But thanks to this arbitrary limitation, I need a rat's nest of power cables and converters to get that to work.

Asking for this is not "crying," and there is nothing immature or entitled about it. Your penchant for insulting those who disagree with you, rather then presenting sound arguments, isn't going to win any hearts and minds.

There are clear consumer benefits to open ecosystems, so we are absolutely right to want them, and (if we choose) to use legislation to force them.

The "evil" here is blocking compatibility with third party components. Open systems are good for the economy and good for the end-user.

Whether the way Nintendo went about it is illegal isn't for me to say. I am not a lawyer and anyway I don't have all the facts. But I DO know that Nintendo is extremely successful in this market and charges a premium for their hardware and their games, so it feels injuriously greedy of them to block third party hardware as well.

They could have chosen to do right by their customers, but they took the low road.

Shame on you, Nintendo.