Well, they won't be able to calculate how much the USA is giving up to other countries. Then again, given the current administration and hallucinating AI, they can just make stuff up?

Getting policy right is hard. Sometimes you need to prepare a mindset change or test out an approach, though certainly there are things that fail miserably due to unintended consequences. See this like developing software, but instead it is policy.

What will be interesting is how long before the W3C comes up with a solution that can work across browsers and websites, and then how long before it gets adopted by browsers and websites.

Irrationality. I remember it well. Quoting Wikipedia: "Irrational exuberance" is the phrase used by the then-Federal Reserve Board chairman, Alan Greenspan, in a December 1996 speech given at the American Enterprise Institute during the dot-com bubble of the 1990s.

They probably did their research, for what people would pay, especially taking into account crazy fashion choices and the FOMO factor.

Though if Google is setting "ninety-day countdown to full disclosure regardless", then they are essentially pressuring a group og volunteers to change focus and deal with that problem. That's the spiteful part. If Google cared about the open source it benefits from, they could set aside some devs or even provide some financial help to deal with this,

A company like Google could even contribute quality fixes, but by humans. Asking volunteers to solve a problem that the multi-million dollar company is benefiting from is cheap and spiteful, especially if said company provides no value to the project.

Maybe this is incentive to help design data centres that are less power demanding, such as using computers that use ARM and are better with how their code is implemented?

Then combine that with roof top renewables.

This is a hard problem, but if the economic incentive is there, then someone will want to address it.

Don't pilots usually train and certify on just one type of aircraft? In other words, Airbus pilots don't fly Boeing, etc. If all the MD11 planes end up permanently mothballed by the two main operators of them (FedEx and UPS), what happens to the pilots who are trained to fly them? Will they have an opportunity to train on another aircraft type, or will they end up without a job? Are there other planes sufficiently similar to the MD11 that their training won't be too lengthy? Wikipedia mentions it last flew for passenger service in 2008, but doesn't mention it having been developed into anything else.

Of course it doesn't seem like this is a great time to be a pilot, given the ATC issues we're facing in this country - but that's a different issue.

That makes two dictionaries that chose two words for the 2025 word of the year. I will say I like this one better than the choice from Merriam-Webster.

You are also making an assumption that it is easy to find alternative store fronts for this content, especially when people arenâ(TM)t wanting to pay for yet another streaming platform

The day will come that an AI will learn something that we did not deliberately teach it. When an AI is able to improve its own code, it won't be bound by the limitations of its human creator. It's only a question of when.

LK

Experiments can be crafted in such a way as to exclude certain human beings from consciousness.

One day, it's extremely likely that a machine will say to us "I am alive. I am awake. I want..." and whether or not it's true is going to be increasingly hard to determine.

LK

Only if we define consciousness to be a state of awareness only attainable by human beings.

Can we?

It's only a matter of time until an AI can learn to do something it wasn't programmed by us to do.

Can a non-biological entity feel desire? Can it want to grow and become something more than what it is? I think that's a philosophical question and not a technological one.

LK

You forgot about the hallucinating AIs, which while they can provide useful information, are prone to making shit up.