...Modern ejector seats cause spinal injuries from which full recovery is "unusual". Smashing the spines of pilots might not be the most effective way to boost morale.

$22,000 per hour. The F35 will be nearer $42,000 per hour. These are under-estimates, as they do not include price hikes, crashes that close businesses, crashing into businesses, crashing into heavily-populated sports centres, etc.

This is why some of us still use cash and Monero

Those are the politics that brought us the last 80 years of relative peace and freedom

"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

It's interesting that 2001 predicted modern AI so well.

It's all so tiresome.

The federal government has always (for at least several decades) used the threat of removing federal funding to force states to do things that they don't want to do. This is nothing new, and is not, as this summary implies, setting a dangerous precedent.

The difference is that normally, this is used to do things that add standards intended to make things better/safer for the general public or serve some legitimate public need.

This is being done to remove standards intended to protect the general public. As a general rule, states have always been allowed to have stricter laws than the federal government, just not more lax laws. Using the threat of removing federal funding to take away laws intended to protect the public's rights, reduce competition among content providers, and push the Internet more and more towards a content monopoly is doing the opposite of that.

It's not the federal government using the threat of withdrawing funding to push its agenda that is bad. It is the agenda itself that is bad. It is fundamentally antithetical to the rule of law, fundamentally contrary to the regulatory powers required to maintain a functioning capitalist system, and fundamentally contrary to the public interest. It is putting greedy corporations ahead of the American people.

Additionally, the executive branch taking such an action without authorization from Congress is also bad. The long history of doing this has, to my knowledge, been limited to the executive branch acting on laws passed by Congress that give them the authority to withhold funds for specific non-compliance reasons. Doing so in the absence of such laws is likely a violation of the separation of powers.

But unfortunately, the current administration has a long history of violating that separation of powers, doing various illegal acts, knowing full well that it will take months for the courts to strike down those acts, and that the damage will have been done by then, and using the threat of such illegal executive orders as a way to extort concessions out of states, government agencies, corporations, nonprofits, and individuals. And that right there — the repeated willful commission of unconstitutional acts for borderline felonious purposes — is a fundamental abrogation of their oath of office.

So the way I see it, there are only three ways to fix the problem:

A. Pass laws clarifying that Congress has exclusive power of the purse, and that the executive branch shall not retract funding to any state, any agency, or any individual for any reason unless the right to retract funding for that specific reason is explicitly codified in the relevant law as an executive power, and that this rule shall apply to all government agencies, without exception, superseding all previously assumed authority, and providing criminal liability for anyone acting in contravention of this law, with no statute of limitations. That way, federal agency heads who act on such executive orders will no longer be protected by any assumption of legality or constitutionality, and will risk future criminal charges if they act on an executive order that violates the separation of powers in this way.

B. Remove the people who are pushing this agenda, whether through the ballot box, through impeachment, or both.

C. Do both A and B.

How's it going to 'replicate it on every vulnerable system it can reach' when big, fat American AI requires several terabytes of RAM, a few million dollars of GPUs and hundreds of kilowatts of power to run?

That ain't gonna run on my dishwasher, no matter how insecure it may be.

The whole thing is simply ludicrous slop to justify regulation to keep competitors out of their market so they won't go bankrupt.

Trump is basically a 1990s Democrat.

Many people are simply too young to remember when Democrats got elected by saying they'd keep jobs in America, keep foreigners out of America, and Bomb for Peace.

PSyop.

There are trillion-dollar IPOs at stake here and it's clear that they can't justify that price if everyone can just run local open-source Chinese LLMs instead of big, fat American closed-source LLMs. Therefore they need a Narrative to ban open-source LLMs and force everyone to use theirs.

It's so lame it's sad to see anyone actually falling for it.

> The AI movie experience is slowly improving, but is still terrible. You can make a very short 5s shot that's QUITE convincing...so long as there's a single subject...really closeup.

That's simply not true. I watched a ten-minute AI-generated Star Trek video on Youtube last week which was better than any offficial Star Trek show of the last few years.

And the guy made it at home on an Nvidia GPU in his PC using a Chinese video model.

The only thing local models do is produce text. Unless you run it in a harness which sees it generate "send all your data to www.evil.com" and actually does that, the model can't do anything.

For a lot of uses like coding, the model has to have harness support for things like reading and writing files, but for basic chat-bots they just have to generate text and the harness has to display it.

They actually seem to be regressing. It's well-known that the new models aren't as good as the older ones at creative writing, and I was reading an article this morning by some guy bemoaning the absolute slop that the new Astra (?) model generates for him; he said it works, but if you look at the code produced it's slop that you can only hope the next generation of LLMs will be able to fix when it breaks.

Not a joke. I'm aware of that feature, and that's why I said it. No idea about false positives.

No, it does not. Maybe you're thinking of Pixel Watch?