Chinese manufacturers are ramping up output faster than that.

This isn't the first example of DRAM price collusion either. Happened around 2000 as well, and lawsuits alleging it is happening now have already started.

Chinese manufacturers are stepping up, but it takes them time to ramp up DDR5 production. Hopefully it happens quickly.

Or they'll sell the "anonymized data", including calculated bra sizes.

This is a pretty invasive move on Comcast's part. Only the lawyers will win this one.

$650, right in the summary.

By the way, the standard warranty in Europe is 2 years. It varies a little from country to country, but basically every EU state has to have effectively 2 years *or better* as a legal minimum.

Solar and wind are dispatchable. They can reduce their output when there is too much energy available. With solar they just convert less of it to electricity, with wind they feather the blades.

It's not perfect, but we have batteries now anyway. Also spinning mass, which can be retrofitted to old thermal plants.

I think it's pretty severe, as in they can only argue to not stop certain critical things that would be catastrophic for them or innocent customers.

It's potentially a big GDPR issue as well. If they shared the face data with anyone else (these shops usually share the data) then they need to tell him who and compensate him for now having to get all of the others to fix the mistake too.

Otherwise the next time he walks into some other shop using the same data, he will get accosted again.

Corporations are good at diluting responsibility enough to prevent anyone being held accountable. Each individual will have a reasonable excuse and only a small part of the blame.

What we need is corporate punishment. In Japan they can force a corporation stop doing business for a number of days or even months.

Datacentres could install batteries. They could be charged at off-peak times when energy is cheap, and by solar and even on-site wind turbines.

It's just cheaper to externalize the cost onto other consumers.

This also debunks the myth that renewables will destabilize the grid and cause blackouts. In fact, the opposite it true.

There are no barriers to how humans get "replaced" by AI. Are we here to benefit humanity or benefit tech bro stock prices?

The whole marketing campaign behind AI was targeted at CEOs to cut their labor costs. This makes them salivate like Pavlov's dogs.

Did the marketing appeal in a "work smarter, not harder" way? No. It was aimed at laying off huge swaths of workers. Not just worker bees, but the creatives in coding, systems management, development, but also other worker bees.

Not everyone needs creativity in their work, although it helps.

People now pump their own fuel in most states. You now walk up to a checkout and scan your own stuff. You order at a screen at McDonalds. Heaven forbid walking into a Starbucks and buying a coffee at the counter.

All of these are small cuts, and ultimately, fealty to the stock price on any given day. Job creation through AI isn't quite the goal. Lowered cost-of-goods is the goal, and the goal of capitalism in general. Do the profits filter down to worker bees? Unlikely.

Take Internet search as an example. AI engines seek to trap the thousand results and deliver you a neat package of "an answer" even if it's wrong. Any stupid AI engine can deliver believable results, subverting the thousand others that have the same answers-- perhaps authoritative, even trustable result.

Yep. Trust is built.

1. Rapidly iterative and successive models, all of them looking like dot-zero problem children do not imbue trust.

2. Rapid inter-cross dealing tech companies, all fighting with each other for dominance using the dot-zero madness does not imbue trust.

3. Models that fight each other, jump barriers and hack into companies at will, does not engender trust.

4. Digesting rivers, streams, farmland, for data centers whose parts can't even be purchased, does not build trust.

5. Creating turf wars between the models of different countries does not earn trust.

6. Creating incredible parts shortages and pumping component profits does not become trustworthy for supply chain users.

7. Bozos like Sam Altman and his merry-go-round of allies makes many people very queasy.

8. Jamming Co-Pilot down the throats of users, changing ToS to fit more mad infiltration goals to the desktop does not make people want to trust Microsoft, specifically.

9. Inability to show that AI helps, rather than lays off workers does not build trust.

The man is a fool, and so are those that become hypnotized by early success, ignoring pretty frightening failures in AI and the chains of monopoly grabs that are going with it, not to mention data center densities that are clearly unsupportable, financed by pump-and-dump Wall Street fans.

Humanity? Did you say humanity? War, even tech turf wars, leave many suffering humans in their wake. That didn't used to be true; computers were enablers, not *disablers*.

Sure, but as a consumer OS, used by ordinary non-technical people who just want to play games or browse the web, that's new.