Maybe you're just committed to rage (look, it's Mr Social Media) but IT SEEMS like you're "too stupid" to see that I was very, very specifically criticizing the commenter in the story that complained "How many people does it take to run a data center after taking up all this property and all this land that could have been used for something else?" eg, that data centers don't provide satisfactory employees per area numbers (when that land likely was being used for agriculture, which is generally EVEN FEWER employees per area).

That IS a stupid take.
What's even stupider is misreading my comment as some sort of criticism about agriculture, which it wasn't even faintly.

L2READ, dipshit.

Let's make sure we make in the legal framework to ensure anyone hosting/building llms is held legal& financially liable for any damage they cause?

You know most agricultural work in the US DOESN'T require importation of menial workers, right?

According to grok by value, only 15-25% of farm production requires menial labor, eg migrant workers.
Robotics are likely to significantly reduce that.

My point was that it's just a silly take to say "look at all this land that could have been used for something else" (presumably employing more people) when in fact most of the large swathes of agri land in this country barely employ anyone.

It's like complaining about data centers "using up" 17bn gallons of water when golf courses take something north of 500bn gallons and not saying a word about that.

...is the legal framework that I can hand my logins and all digital accounts to my heirs and assigns upon my death.

I'm going to provide them all the passwords etc regardless but I'd very much like the legal framework to recognize this.

Honestly my biggest challenge is keeping track of all the logins and remembering to update "that document" when I make changes. It's another reason I refuse to (only) use biometric unlocks on devices. There are plenty of use cases I can imagine where I might need someone to unlock something and I'm not present.

How many people does it take to run a data center after taking up all this property and all this land that could have been used for something else?

You mean like farming, where hundreds or thousands of acres are only "worked" by a handful of people or less? I think there are scores of reasons not to cover the world in data centers better than "but they take up space".

... When there are no consequences for bad behavior, it's often the best strategy.

Today, if you're wealthy enough or of the right group of people, you can largely ignore the law as well. And the behaviors are just as opportunistic and amoral.

It's been the basis for elite athletes practice routines for years.
Visualization is sometimes mocked by the ignorant, but even the simple act of visualizing EXACTLY what is happening, what you're doing, what moves you're making, how you're moving...all form & reinforce neural pathways, making both the action and the particular precise details easier to replicate.

I wouldn't call this multitasking, precisely, more like a training-based delegation of muscle functions and basic responses 'lower' in the cerebral/intellectual chain. A different part of you is "thinking" (using that word in a very, very broad extent) through the lowest-level protocols of your body's actions, instead of constantly throwing it to your lower brain functions.

... Only incompetent criminals get caught.

"We haven't seen a surge of attacks" doesn't equate logically to "There haven't been any attacks"

So prove it?

You're pulling an assertion out of your ass and simply insisting "it must be" because that's what your dogma requires.

You asked for a SPECIFIC example, now you refuse to accept it. That's irrational.

The same way I felt before you said it.
Barack Obama got $400k/yr as president, $250k/yr after that. Total income about $8m in 2026.
He's now worth $70m.

They live in 4 homes, primarily;
Oahu $8,4m
Wash DC $8.1m
Martha's Vineyard $11.8m
Chicago $2m
~$30m in homes.

That's pretty good for his income.

"The only solution" is in fact, not the "only" solution.

The correct and LEGAL means for the police to gain access to the phone is to take it and seal it in a tamperproof container (aka electronic Faraday Evidence Bag), go to a court and ask for a warrant to search the contents.

We have established LAW and procedures for the state to gain access to the device. It is inconvenient ON PURPOSE. and serves as a checks and balance in legal proceedings.

IF that is the case, seize the phone, get a Search Warrant.

The problem is, the state couldn't be bothered following ESTABLISHED law and procedures.

Simply accusing someone of some unspecified crime isn't a right the state has to just bypass Constitutional protections, namely the 4th and 5th Amendments.

Americans have rights, secured in our founding Constitution. I don't care what feelings one might have to the rest of the case. Rights exist, enshrined and we ought to defend them tirelessly forever.

There is some established case law that says that one cannot be compelled to give up a Password, Pin or Pattern Unlock, as a violation of the 4th and 5th Amendment.

Those Amendments are key to a person's rights to be SECURE. Which is the key word here. He SECURED his rights, under duress, by refusing to comply.

THIS is separate from the police chasing him as a possible criminal for crimes I may or may not like.

Rights work by being the STARTING POINT, not an afterthought or worse, something the state can simply ignore in an attempt to prosecute people for potential criminal activity.

The state has legal remedies they ought to seek if they want access to secured personal property. We all know what that is. GET A WARRANT, which is almost always a rubber stamp (very easy bar to jump over). They couldn't even be bothered with that.

Everyone ought to understand, if we do not defend our rights, the state certainly won't.

This is why I otoh assert that legal conclusions are oversimplistically binary - guilty or not guilty - which obfuscates reality in ways that both protect the guilty and harm the less-guilty.

Guilty red-handed - if a guy in a batman costume is LITERALLY ARRESTED IN THE COURSE OF SHOOTING UP A THEATER - that is guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt. The trial should be about 15 minutes, the end execution. No 20 year odyssey of scores of trials, appeals, pleas for mercy, whatever, costing the taxpayers $millions.

Anything short of that, I agree, that death penalty is far too irreversible for the many potential accidental- and potentially deliberate points of failure in any complex system.

I think your point is relevant, absolutely, but sometimes a cigar IS a cigar. Chaotic data *can* manifest patterns - eg a "random number generator" might hand you 5 results of 1-1-1-1-1. That may be the result of a *perfectly* random system.

OTOH, as humans we instinctively try to understand/recognize patterns to make predictive leaps. Chaotic data MAY ALSO have very subtle patterns that only appear when you start to do more and more statistical analyses.

The point is we can only take such data as a suggestion for TESTING and investigation.
fMRIs show brain activity in dead salmon. TESTING shows that's noise.
This suggests a periodicity to cataclysms. Only TESTING will help us conclude if this is noise or information.