There is a point where making another remake is riskier than making something new. We passed that point 15 movies ago.

The smart thing to do would have been to hire him if he has credentials that could have been supplied by another nation, to follow him to catch a line on his contacts, and to feed him false information intended for that nation. Or just arrest him after you've verified that he's not, in fact, a double agent and is just working for himself.

One party claims to support things you like. The other doesn't. But both sides support corporatism, the military industrial complex, corruption, and tax loopholes and other perks for the wealthy. Stop supporting the uniparty.

Playboy had some amazing journalism. Read a few and you'll realize "read it for the articles" was a perfectly valid excuse.

That, too, can be abused. The notorious They can just as easily put out a license plate alert for a "kidnapper" who is really wanted for some other reason. Don't say it hasn't happened.

Double fuck you for trying to sell my freedom for safety, for implying this draconian surveillance is necessary, and for using fear to sell tyranny. Your kidnapping fantasy ignores how police actually work.
Real investigations rely on probable cause, warrants, witness tips, and focused detective work. Not a nationwide dragnet that scans every license plate, logging billions of innocent movements for later scrutiny. And if some cases can't be solved, or solved as quickly, that's an absolutely necessary sacrifice.

This pervasive surveillance creates Foucault's Panopticon: a digital eye that chills free movement and association, breeds self-censorship, invites abuse like tracking abortions or protests, and normalizes state ownership of our data. It doesn't secure borders or safety; it erodes the freedoms that define us. My hope for my children is not that they remain safe but that they remain free.

>Do you have good evidence that they have solid security? No? Then you must assume it is bad.

Which in practice means "no open source tools"

I hate the overuse of the word "diabolical" but in this one case, it fits. There's no way a normal coder could detect this. The only fix is to lock down your whole stack rigidly, and pay the price in productivity and unhappy developers.

Let the powerful crush you, as long as the other team gets crushed harder? Instead of picking a political party, why not fight authoritarianism directly?

They haven't been optimizing for box office returns for decades. At this point I don't even care who they choose or why. I'll continue to cherish Goldfinger and Dr. No, but since what they're making these days isn't 007, there are other, higher quality movies to spend my time on.

From the summary, it's not AI-generated writing they're punishing but bad output. They're doing it right. It looks like if you generate your paper with AI but review it thoroughly, and get all the mistakes and hallucinations out, it's fine.

I want to say the trade policies are bananas. But reality is, it's not hard for the Chinese government to slip tracking or sabotage code into cars sent to America. This kind of spy game is exemplified in recent hardware manipulation from both sides.

Maybe they're preparing the rocket for high draw auxiliary power associated with payloads and humans.

The best protection against cheating is to test for application of knowledge, not for knowledge. Give them an LLM. Give them Wikipedia. Give them all the resources they'll have in the wild, then judge the output on quality. This does enormously increase the difficulty of grading and make it somewhat more subjective, but that's the tradeoff and it's necessary.

The second best protection is to allow students to prepare an index card ahead of time and put whatever they want on it. It really works for getting them to focus on the test, to remember material, and to spend time, effort and thought on it.

In other news, people who can afford the best medical care are also more likely to have time and money to visit museums and practice music.