I already apologized for making the mistake of thinking you might not be a complete idiot. Following up with a post to prove that you are one was a completely superfluous act. Off you go now ...

I apologize for thinking you are finally starting to get a clue. As usual you continue to make absurd and unsubstantiated claims based on a lack of understanding of the subject matter. AI is much better at *finding* *vulnerabilities*, and that is the issue. How hard it is to code an exploit is a secondary issue, though of course frontier models are more than capable of doing that as well. They also reason and work as a team to achieve goals. You might try watching the OpenAI Black Hat 2026 presentation on the hugging face incident so that you don't perpetuate this bizarre habit you have of making absurd and easily discounted claims.

It's good to see you make the transition from "LLMs are just word predictors" to "they present a serious problem that will require software engineers" (Quoted text is paraphrasing.) Unfortunately, just as video killed the radio star, Agile killed the software engineer.

You have to have literally no idea what is going on in the AI domain in order to make such an absurd statement. The hugging face incident is just one of a plethora of data points that your claim, oft parroted by people like yourself who have no experience with AI and no real knowledge or understanding of it, continue to parrot like a 1st generation LLM, is stupid, ridiculous, and uninformed.

It is ironic that you are calling someone an idiot while concurrently demonstrating your lack of understanding between "this" and "that", but it turns out that your comment was accidentally correct.

It's more a case of the fox being in charge of the chicken coop; or bank robbers gaining control of the bank.

The job of the press in a democracy is to hold officials up to scrutiny.

I am actually thinking about my next BMW (my current one is getting old). Knowing this, the iX3 is off the list.

BMW had a great control system, intuitive, possible to do many things without even looking. "Young people prefer" ? Really? The young people that actually buy your cars? Well, they'll learn and not prefer touchscreens anymore on the 2nd car.

Global AI tech spending is said to surpass 2.5 trillion this year.

Sorry, Gates is a small fish in that pond.

I've heard some pretty sad excuses for AI slop (Shunned at a Funeral) but some very clever uses for it too (Amelia). "The best thing the government did...was invent me!"

As long as they're honest about it being AI I'll decide what I want to listen to. It's hard for it to show any creativity, but creativity is sorely lacking in all current music.

...laura

The logic is economic autarky -- the belief that we're always better off having complete political sovereignty over every part of our supply chains than having to depend on imports for anything.

This is likely also behind Trump's trade war with Canada. His demands with Canada aren't about discirimatory tariffs -- those were negotiated away with NAFTA then re-negotiated in his first term. His demands are now infringe on Canadian sovereignty, to give US control of Canada's external trade policy, and even on its internal markets (e.g., the use of French in Canadian internal commerce). Symbolically, that's why he wants to rename Lake Ontario to "Lake America". HIs establishment of US control over the Venezuelan oil industry is his greatest foreign policy achievement -- although it's not clear he understands the legal limits on what he can do with their money.

There's a foreign and military policy angle to this too: Taiwan is absolutely critical to the US economy, so we are absolutely committed to defend them if China invades. Semiconductor autarky would mean it's not our problem.

The problem with autarky is that even if it's a good idea (which economists don't believe), you can't conjure it into existence overnight. It will take many years, possibly decades for the US to replace the Taiwan's semiconductor industry. In effect, the administration is proposing to inflict the very damage on the US economy that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would inflict.

And, once the US has voluntarily self-inflicted that damage, China would be free to invade Taiwan.

So your comment that "I made your point" was supposed to be interpreted as "You successfully countered my point ... Ha Ha"? I wish you knew the definition of sarcasm.

I'm not sure if you are being intentionally disengenuos by omitting the fact that Claude Code is not the source code for Claude, but either way you're pay is stupid. The good news is that you can, with your far superior serious knowledge and skills, spin up a major player in the AI space yourself and get rich in no time. g00d 1uck!

The two articles were probably written by two different ghost-writers.

AI isn't actually smart. It's an at best average intelligence thing with an insane amount of available knowledge. Like the village idiot with eidetic memory.

As soon as you do any work with AI that's not available as a ready-to-apply solution from its training data, you begin to notice how much you need to correct it, keep it on track, remind it of basic constraints you already mentioned five times, etc. - it's performing at a level I'd accept from an intern, but not from a co-worker.

What it does have is data. Tons of data. Any question that would take you and me half an hour on Google and Wikipedia to answer it can answer in 10 seconds. That's a great tool. It is not intelligence, however.

How is this "news that matter"?

Bill Gates is an old man who has zero AI credentials and has long ago become irrelevant. Not to mention his previous predictions of future developments are not exactly brilliant.