The Pirate Bay: The Movie coming soon to a torrent site near you.

Not exactly. Personal originally meant "not shared with another person". Originally, it meant a computer only you have access to, only you install and run software, and only you store and retrieve data.

Not especially. Remember, Google pays Apple about $20 billion/year to be the default search in Safari. The reports are that Apple pays Google $1 billion for Gemini.

And if we're honest, Gemini is not the clear-cut best model, it's just that Google and Apple already have a pretty good relationship. Given the amount of Capex Google is putting into AI/Gemini, they need to make money from SOMEWHERE, and Apple is a reliable partner. I'm sure they're extremely relieved that Apple is going with them instead of Anthropic. Though, indeed, there's no reason for Apple to only rely on one vendor.

This whole thing shows that LLMs and models are already being commodified. Who knows if some of these companies will ever make their money back.

There's no such 'well known fact'. Apple Phones have historically had some of the best battery life in their generations, with occasional outliers. (If we compare the latest Samsung vs. the latest iPhone, for example, the iPhone has significantly better battery life.)

On the other hand, there are occasional Android phones with absolutely absurd batteries that last a couple days on a charge with the tradeoff of looking like a pound of butter. The fact that these have better battery life is not surprising and is the actual outlier.

Look at most instruction manuals. Look at most architectural blueprints. Look at a schematic. Look at a recipe book. Look at most other "work products" that amount to human-readable instruction manuals.

Now look for the "why". "Why are we doing this in the first place." "Why did we do it this way vs. the various alternatives." Etc.

Sometimes you will see the "why" but most of the time you won't.

At least code has the advantage of having a mechanism to put the documentation near the relevant portion of the final work product.

Crucially, in all but a few languages, whitespace doesn't matter at all. The parser throws it out.

Whitespace is a HUMAN affordance for a HUMAN audience. If you think it looks kinda okay, that's all that's needed. You absolutely cannot do that with code that actually does something.

I suppose, fundamentally, all code is for humans to read; the CPU doesn't care how the bits got organized. But LLMs can't just jump straight to the compiled output, they have to come back to the intermediary of human-readable language, and that means they're bound by the limitations of the languages we've asked them to write in. That also means that they write bugs and bad code because they're trying to produce readable tokens that possibly do the thing you ask, and they're not writing the code and testing it and refining it in a tight loop before delivering it.

When I write code, a function may see multiple passes before I even show it to anyone else. If you don't understand the output the LLM is giving you, but it compiles and vaguely does the thing that you ask, you might take it at face value on the first pass. And since the code is only receiving "yeah, that looks right," level scrutiny, it's so much more likely to be bad.

It won't.

Making games isn't actually that easy? I've been doing it for 25 years, and making a game that's good that people enjoy requires, in no small part, that you yourself enjoy playing games, and that you understand what fun is.

It's not just the designers that make games fun, either, even if they're responsible for a lot of the mechanics. Every breakdown of job responsibilities I've ever seen (which we use come review time) has something in it about how you understand game mechanics and your ability to make contributions in that regard, and that's regardless of whether you're in design or art or programming. As a programmer, I'm not tasked specifically with making the game mechanics--I'm there to make a platform for designers to execute their vision--but I have made changes independently that have shipped effectively untouched in the final game.

So all that to say, if you use AI to write your games and you're not a solo designer, your games will probably be worse. The bigger the game gets, the more you'll feel the lack of scrutiny from individual contributors. Any of the small, interesting, fun details you've played in a game up until now was almost certainly put there by a real human that wanted that to be in a game themselves.

There's a possibility that AI will make my job easier or make me a bit faster, but I'm not losing my job to AI (though a greedy CEO may blame it on AI). There are ALREADY a zillion games out there. The barrier to making games is low. If all you want to crank out is slop, bad news: humans have been doing that for decades now. Slop by an AI agent isn't actually going to do any better.

This is a threat of referral to criminal prosecution. Criminal prosecution is a government, not personal or corporate activity. What I say here is that such threats are empty.

People do get that wrong a lot though. Apparently even Microsoft, the FBI and US Attorneys these days.

Apparently, you have never installed Nagios. Back in the days, when you ran the install script, it wrote out what it was doing, and then suddenly the lines appeared:

It was the same warning to you to vet any code before executing it.

Pretty high, I would wager. Alcohol and coding don't mix.

There's a lot of speculation about life as we don't know it. And that's what it is: speculation. While there are microbes that don't rely on oxygen, and one animal, they are utterly dependent on environments that do require oxygen. So no abiotic life origins here.

Without knowing for sure what to look for in a chlorine based life form even with it live in front of us, performing the forensic search with the body cold billions of years is all but impossible. We will get there some day but people are looking for signs unambiguous, and that means life as we know it.

In the US this is protected speech. There is a flaw in published software such that x and y... This is a statement of observed fact no matter how obscure.

Poor form, yes. Illegal, no. To threaten or intimidate rather than fix the fault is reliance on the ancient Microsoft trope security through obscurity. Tolerance of that oppressive behavior makes us less secure, not more.

Closing their account on your service is fair game though. No obligation to host anyone for any reason.

Dealing with aggrieved customers is just a part of doing business with the public. No matter how well you behave some people just have issues, and some will have legitimate complaints. Microsoft is a multitrillion dollar multinational corporation. That comes with the turf.

>And they will have arisen long long before the explosion.

I am no expert but... At a propellant feed rate of 2,300kg per second and a turbine speed of 19000 rpm that's a lot of mass in motion to come to a sudden stop. At 350 bar of turbopump pressure I can see there being a lot of bang at the first sign of trouble. The engineering limits on these devices may not be fully characterized until mass production has rolled for a while.

We're spending trillions on AI. If your business plan is sucking wind on 0.3 of an x, you lack the vision to stay in the game.

JPG 10 year is at 2.6% yield. US Treasury 10 year is at 4.44%.

Whose debt burden is the problem here?