For some reason, the Control Panel is still here after 10+ years of trying to get the Settings app to be feature complete

Because Control Panel is the best and fastest way to find what you want. It is clearly laid out, descriptive, and allows you to get things done.

Whereas, Settings is configured as if someone threw a ball of yarn into a box and let a cat play with it, then the cat threw up from playing so hard.

No, it's fine. Texas says so.

The blame for this falls squarely on the politics surrounding education fads. We abandon the boring things that work in favor for the new exciting crap that doesn't. And it's not because anyone really thinks it works, but because there are billions behind the new crap.

Parental apathy factors into this as well, no doubts.

We know what works, so ask yourself why we aren't using it.

At least it's not more Star Wars slop.

I'd prefer if it applied to people who drive below the speed limit, brake at green lights, or who brake going down small hills. That, and those who drive Subarus or Buicks.

You want Iran to have nukes to spite Trump.

I want Irant to have nukes to piss off Israel.

We are not the same.

One aspect of enshittification that people don't talk about much is that sites do need to make money to continue. They can't be free forever.

Yes they can. If musicians, software companies, and movie producers don't need to be paid for what they produce, these sites don't need to be paid either.

Only if you say it's OK elsewhere.

To train an LLM during flight.

How can you "forget how to code"? That's like forgetting how to tie your shoes or ride a bike - I can't imagine it happening to anyone.

Ok, I'm imagining a class of high school students breaking the guardrails, getting it to report that they're doing brilliantly and deserve A+ while they watch tiktok... at the very least they'll make it say racist things and publish that on tiktok for the lulz. It'll also find a way to organically mention how much its been hearing that everyone else really likes new Pepsi Cherry Zero on a daily basis too.

Is that not the outcome you were imagining too?

Oooh... yes please, i can't wait for virtual Feyman prefacing his lectures with the lords prayer, explaining how God created the universe and all the physics in it; and also: you look thirsty, there is a Pepsi machine with new Pepsi Cherry Zero in the hallway; have you tried it?

Einstein meanwhile extols the virtue of Zionist colonization in Palestine...

Wait? Do you actually think that it would go differently? If we create puppets of brilliant revered thinkers they'll inevitably say whatever slop some combination of political appointees and advertising companies want them to say. Why on earth would anyone think they would be used for anything else?

Its frequently used on general elective courses because they're big enough (often hundreds of students) that the statistical variation between student cohorts fits normal curves pretty well.

That doesn't even make sense. The defining characteristic of a credential mill is that it passes everyone who goes. A curve grading system assigns Fs and Ds and C- to the bottom of every class.

Meanwhile, at Harvard, right now, everyone who goes and shows up to class passes, and half of them get As. How is that not "essentially a credential mill" right now?

Even more damning, a generation ago 25% of them got As. What's your theory on that? Harvard students this generation are just a lot smarter and more studious and they're mastering the material at a much higher rate? Or that Harvard is handing As out like participation trophies now?

I know where my money is at. And Harvard's own teaching staff agrees.

Your splitting hairs. The OP complained that having your grade affected by the grades of your peers was wrong. Then you said, well it would be fine if they based the grades on the "top score" which is still having your grade determined by what (one of) your peers did.

If your 40% on the exam would be an A if the brightest kid got a 44% but would be a B+ if the brightest kid got a 48%, I doubt the OP would be any "happier" with that situation.

An AI has no capability to have feelings

And what is a feeling? Based on Wiki:

In other words, a feeling is a reaction to an external stimuli. Since reactions are nothing but the neural connections in our brains responding to the external stimuli, there is little reason to say an AI, with its digital connections, can't respond to external stimuli in a similar fashion.

Bcause your sister couldn't be bothered to write things down, this is MS' fault?