In the end the politicians don't give a fuck about what people want or being moral or anything like that. They have an agenda. They're acting the exact same way that conspiracy theorists have been claiming all politicians think like for decades, except it looks to me like now the conspiracy theorists have gotten into government they feel this is a way they have a right to act, rather than something they should be changing.

Add to that the rampant corruption in American politics that's always been there, but the public has largely ignored for a half century or more, and we're reaching what you might call a techno-corruption singularity.

And that's coming with consequences. In an extreme case, we've seen the murder of an insurance CEO because nobody has been keeping the insurance industry in check. The Democrats even had a chance to when passing the ACA, but instead gave them perverse incentives to negotiate higher prices with healthcare providers and likewise find excuses to decline expensive treatments. I'm not saying Brian Thompson was a saint, far from it, I'm saying Brian Thompson would never have been CEO had the ACA not had the 10% profit cap without simultaneously addressing the effective need for publicly traded corporations to increase profits year on year.

But we also see smaller attacks on the system like this one. And I don't see the situation getting any better. Not only will we need to stop electing politicians who don't care, but it's going to take 25 years or more of electing politicians who do, and who dismantle the giant pile of shit we're all in, before people start to have any trust in the system any more, trust enough to elect the type of people who can be trusted. Yes, they won't elect people who can fix the system until those people have already been elected. How's that for a Catch 22?

> However, your data completely ignores if the suspects are being compliant or not

Then

> due to the suspects being non-compliant/hostile/violent/dangerous

This expansion of non-compliance with violent/dangerous is what makes you a bootlicking fascist.

In a civilized democratic society, non-compliance with a police officer is not an excuse for summary execution. The only case in which it is legitimate for an officer to kill a person is to prevent a loss of life caused by that person's likely actions. No other reason.

Did the suspect say mean words and refuse to let you handcuff them? Pull up your fucking big boy pants you sniveling shit and find a way to resolve the issue peacefully, don't stick your hand on your gun like it's your fucking penis.

It wouldn't have even been a problem if they were transgender mice. What is the problem with studying transgenderism, especially in a safe, controlled, environment that doesn't cause harm to people?

Leaving aside that dementia is not a mental illness, I'm unaware of any caused by viruses that aren't a side effect.

For example Alzheimers can be caused indirectly by viruses, but its cause isn't a virus, it's likely neuroinflammation, which can be caused by all kinds of things including bacteria and certain types of plaque.

Worse, the latter is generally because the brain's own immune system is causing the inflammation fighting said virus when it is a virus, and so a vaccine would cause more problems rather than help.

Using vaccines here is just not a practical course of action and betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what dementia is. And mental illnesses? They're even less likely to have clear causes outside of genetics and exposure to various environmental factors not generally considered biological.

If mental illnesses were caused by viruses, sure. But the entire point of a vaccine is to stimulate your immune system into creating antibodies to fight specific viruses. I've pretty sure no mental illnesses have been found to have a viral cause (well, social media "viral" may be, but not biological...)

I think you vastly over-estimate how much MAGA cares. If the COVID vaccine had been conventional, they'd have been just as loud and angry and anti, but they wouldn't have put "UnPrOvEn tEcHnOlOgY" in their list of annoying arguments.

> Funny, how the authors don't hate the would-be arsonists — nowhere close to their disdain for the "rich and powerful", who might (might not!) profit from the betting...

Not really funny, it's pretty obvious they're trying to discourage arsonists. If you'd read your own post before posting it, you'd have noticed they haven't written in opposition to people betting on "hurricanes, floods, and tsunamis", which you give as examples of "similar" things but give lipservice to the fact they can't be man made.

This is specifically about avoiding rewarding people for placing bets on wildfires existing and then organizing their creation. You'd have to be dumber than a libertarian or Trump supporter not to see that.

Given your username, have you not seen the sheer amount of pro-AI BS that's been infesting every aspect of society?

Even Bernie Sanders has bought the propaganda.

I use so little EA stuff these days Deluxe Paint is literally the first thing I think of when I hear the name!

I guess it's like hearing "HP printer" and thinking of those awesome postscript-running built-like-tanks laser printers nobody could afford in the 1980s/90s rather than $100 ink.

How the mighty have fallen *sighs*

Does this mean I can't use Deluxe Paint III on my Amiga any more? *sighs* OK then!

> But that narrative was the only thing that could have made the large LLMs profitable and it was what brought the employee-hating CEOs on board.

Doesn't have to be sustainable, just needs to keep businesses using them for long enough that critical business knowledge is lost among employees who become reliant upon the LLM providers for everything.

The question was never "Is this unsustainable if taken at face value", because the plot was never to sell useful services, it was to take over most US businesses by making them unable to run themselves. The question now is whether they managed to keep it going for long enough that this will happen, or whether the crash will happen before that to happen.

People often describe BigAI as a con. But BigAI is better described as a heist.

Because a lot of corps are saying the opposite right now, saying you'll be judge on your use of AI, and punished for your lack of use of it.

Which is why you get insane shit like people punching bullet points into ChatGPT telling it to expand it into a full email, and the recipient receiving it and putting that into ChatGPT to summarize it as a set of bullet points.

I'd say I'm glad the companies who have been doing this are the ones who'll eventually go tits up when the bill comes in (which is more than the cost of tokens, it's the lack of control over their own businesses), but the reality is that management isn't the group that'll suffer. The people fired for non-compliance with this stupidity are merely the first in a long line of people who'll get hurt despite never doing anything more than what their managers said they had to do.

This timeline absolutely sucks.

You put cameras on every surface. You end up with a spinning 360 degree view that you can unspin programmatically.

I'm not really seeing an issue TBH especially with how small and thin cameras are these days and, indeed, that moving them continually combining them with other views from cameras in the same sphere means you can almost certainly build up a higher quality image than you would with a single camera.

> You can hardly blame Google for that

You can, actually, blame Google for implementing an unnecessary code signing requirement that only works if Google is allowed to do business in your country.

Also, well done Google! You've just given millions of people entirely legitimate reasons to find workarounds your attempt to lock up Android, and entire Nation States a legitimate excuse to hack your operating system, or even ban it and support free forks.

It's not illegal, but it will almost always result in a mistrial and a referral to the Bar if done by a lawyer.