Yes to both.

Learning involves insight and no serious legal assessment will ever accuse LLMs to have insight. As to derivative work, the only way to "clean" input is a clean-room process and that critically involves some person doing a creative process to turn a spec into a product. If that happens to create something similar, it is fine. But the key is the creative act that made the original is NOT copied and an new (not necessarily different, but necessarily independent) creative act is used instead. And as LLMs doe not do "creative" either....

Obviously, the LLM cultists will see that very different, but the courts will very likely not.

True

Google refuses all of that. Basically all of the tech companies do.

They probably just did not have any major Azure security compromises or outages in the last few months. Obviously, that will not keep.

Personal recent experience? The one time I tried to use o365 email in the last 3 weeks, I had to wait for an hour until it was up again. Utterly pathetic.

They have a lot of momentum by mindless followers that cannot imagine ever using something different.

I guess that one will still take a while. We could have a non-Windows EU in 10 or 20 years though. If you remove Windows (and Office), MS technology is just a 3rd rated joke these days. They probably cannot survive the next stage of the CRA either.

This would be a good time to point out that every political argument has two sides and two points of view.

I've seen the arguments for both sides of this issue, and have come to the conclusion that there is merit for both. People should really look at the specific charges being made, with examples, before coming to any conclusion.

Every time someone tries to rein in the news media, it's received by shouts of first amendment, freedom of speech, chilling effects, and so on; and yet, this leads to insane situations. Google most egregious US media failures in the last 10 years for a list of incidents, and note how many of these affected major political events such as a presidential election or national policy.

Should a journalist be able to walk into a church during service and interrupt the proceedings, and not be held accountable because he's a journalist? Should a major news outlet be able to report something without at least a cursory check to see if it's accurate? Should an interview answer be swapped with the answer from a different question?

I've come to the conclusion that knee-jerk framing is on purpose, everyone wants to get "ahead" of an issue, and if an erroneous/misleading/false statement is made they will simply say "oops... I made a mistake" and there's no repurcussions... except that the lie went out to the audience and a small percentage got outraged in the right direction, regardless of whether the statement is true or not.

A "straw-man" argument is where you put your opponent's viewpoint in the most absurd terms and then attack the absurdity. A "strong-man" argument is where you put your opponent's viewpoint in the strongest possible terms and then try to attack it.

Choose the "strong-man" argument here. Find out what the administration is complaining about, and see if you can fault their logic.

IIRC the accident statistics on Tesla and Google auto-driving vehicles show that they're safer than an average newly minted 16 year-old driver, and we've (almost) all been that person at one time.

Ad when has any member of this Sadministration bothered to comply with the Constitution, the law, or an executive order? They do whatever they feel will please the Orangutan in Chief so that he can direct some of the graft their way.

Most people are honorable and will not do it. The reminder (people of low quality) can at least be immediately and publicly kicked off the project when they lie. And that threat alone should scare them enough.

If you read the second paragraph of my posting, you will see that I have addressed that as well.

And yet, there were long-running lawsuits about single lines of code or utterly trivial interfaces. Methinks you have no clue what you are talking about.

The problem is that Excel is entirely the wrong tool for something like that. Using it this way is basically gross negligence.

And it works badly. I have personally recovered data were the document was "reviewed". They just were smart enough to ask an actual expert in addition.

And what rules would those be?