The side where they commit fewer crimes than the people hired to police them, and pay more in taxes than it costs to support them. You Nazi maggots don't have any good arguments, run along now.

Surely we can trust Microsoft's statements on the matter! They have never lied before!

What drugs? There was no evidence of drugs, only of war crimes.

Between that and all of the AC posts about how anyone who thinks American officials should be held accountable is supporting Iranian terrorists this place is creepy AF. It's like the haunted woods in Oz.

Yes, but same for America as we know it. It's always operated as an oligarchy, no matter what dressings-up have been wrapped around that. It was founded on genocide and treaty breaking and slavery is in the constitution today and we still have slaves picking cotton.

And we were informed at least about the number of strikes due to an Obama EO which Trump tore up, but not until after through it we learned that he was authorizing four times as many strikes as did Obama.

I know that there was some text after this that's relevant, but there still must surely have been a better way to put this. Also, the odds of anyone responsible being held accountable for that ever are roughly zero.

Didn't it arguably already end with learning autocomplete?

How

That's not the whole story, it leaves out the parts about the Heritage Foundation, which was also behind Project 2025. In short, Rapeublicans politically mobilized the religious reich to vote for the worst people, while simultaneously attacking public education in order to make malleable voters. It worked.

Microsoft is an Automated, AI-Powered Phishing-as-a-Service Platform. The service is provided to the US Government.

What a surprise a rapeublican is supporting the terrorists in the cabinet

A lobotomy is the only way to make it make sense... I know I'm venturing into dangerous territory here but the jokes write themselves

The white man, as you refer to him, has been looting the world through colonialism for centuries and now holds the wealth. He should give back. But soon we will see what his failure to come good results in as the East rises, and the sun sets on a west that lit itself afire. The West's inability to reconcile its internal inconsistencies is destroying it.

To be fair, a team of competent experts can work with any stupid management "methods" as long as they can basically ignore them. I have seen that with a pretty good team being forced to adopt Agile. They just made the "sprints" 6 months long and proceeded to use what they knew worked.

Well, yes. A long time ago. When I studied CS, they had us take the Calculus and Linear Algebra for Mathematicians (same lecture, same exam). That did weed out about 50%. But it did nothing for CS/IT specific skills. Turns out mathematics is actually not that close to them. Friend of mine failed CS and then went on to get a Math Master's without any problems.

I do not think so, at least not with LLMs. The problem is that an LLM does not even begin to reach the level of reliability of a typical compiler. LLMs hallucinate, create bloated code, leave out functionality that was requested, have no clearly specified functionality, cannot deal with subtleties, etc. Hence LLM-generated code needs to be reviewed carefully and that is probably in the end more expensive than having somebody competent write the code from scratch. There are also indications that reviewing LLM code is mind-numbingly boring and people will burn out doing it, while even now there are not enough people that can do it in the first place.

Also note that the attempts of replacing programmers are _very_ old. When I studied CS almost 40 years ago, the 5GL project had just resoundingly failed. Its idea was to have program specifications in constraint logic and then have the machine create code for that. The problem was not that this did not work. The problem was that creating a specification on the level required was much harder and more time-consuming that writing the code directly with a typical informal or semi-formal specification. And, quite frankly, I see the same problem with LLMs as translation engine, as soon as you need actual production quality code. For producing low-quality slop, LLMs are fine. But that slop will not survive in the real world, especially as the one form of code LLMs are really good at creating is attack code, which does not need to be reliable, secure or maintainable. Hence low-skill hackers got a major upgrade here, while LLM use makes the defenders even weaker.