The most important difference in all your examples is things like tooling and equipment are either strictly necessary to complete the job, or produce so much value in terms of productivity that they are worth the cost. Also, most tooling and equipment lasts longer than an AI token so the cost tends to get spread our over several jobs...

Using AI coding agents has not proven to increase quality or productivity in any meaningful way - increased volume of code does not mean productivity unless you're a middle manager. It's known that it is not strictly needed for the software engineer to do their job. You are not improving the engineer's workflow by mandating AI use, you're just making it more expensive.
=Smidge=

Tesla is already in trouble due to profound incompetence.

It's conspiring because those loopholes exist on the behest of the manufacturers to begin with. They didn't 'react' to the legislation, they helped in crafting it.

It's not even a 'take' - it's literally what happened. It's reality.
=Smidge=

> Meanwhile, that CAFE standards put in place by Bush and Obama mandated ever larger trucks and SUV

It absolutely did not.

The regulations had an exception for trucks and work vehicles. The auto industry then conspired to sell more trucks as high end personal vehicles in order to keep building vehicles without having to meet the regulatory requirements.

The lack of a small vehicle segment is entirely, 100% on the shoulders of auto manufacturers who desperately do not want to build them.
=Smidge=

Good observations, though I am Gen X so after a childhood of editing config.sys to get retail games to run on the PC I have an incredibly high tolerance for putting up with that nonsense.

I'll have to disagree with you on that. What matters for reproducible builds is that the person performing the build has power to set the seed.

True, misinformation coming from "trusted" sources is much more damaging than some idiot with a blog posting nonsense, simply by the fact that it's framed as something trusted by so many others.

False dichotomy. Nobody here is talking about an idiot with a blog posting nonsense.

False information coming from sources that "look" trustable but are actually not are very damaging - on purpose, as that is literally the intent.

Incomplete/biased information from trustable sources that are not deliberately attempting to mislead (as in sources that adhere to the ethics of not presenting information that is factually false, even if the picture is not "complete" as you suggest) is a slight wrong, and has existed since the dawn of the printed word - it's editorial in nature - but its effects on creating social problems pales in comparison to weaponized disinformation campaigns.

Hand-wringing about the later as if it's some kind of new thing, or something most people don't know about strikes me as super naive. The insidiousness of the former is simply that people don't appreciate the scale to which it's happening.

No, but treating two wrongs as the same degree of wrongness is pretty dumb.

Or just shit like this: https://www.wsj.com/business/m...

I'm a busy man. I'm also a lazy man. Could someone tell me if this is cheaper or more expensive than a desktop gaming PC with the same stats?

Additionally, the way it's phrased, as a "bet," is implicitly skeptical.

There is no question that states are betting on AI.

You seem to have misunderstood.

The claim here is the battery cells are themselves 3D printed, not that they are stuffing already made cells into a 3D printed object. The batteries would not have to "fit in" the 3D print, they would be the 3D print.

So it's actually dumber than you thought.
=Smidge=

> So I already use a tool like this. It's called Voicy. I use it because I've been writing so many long prompts that I developed relatively severe tendonitis in my left arm.

Have you ever used a computer before LLMs became a thing?

If yes, how did you manage to not hurt yourself before your life was nothing but writing prompts?

(Maybe the solution is to stop writing prompts and go back to doing what you did before, is what I'm suggesting)
=Smidge=

Not once the console maker shuts down the platform's reactivation servers.

Or say the publisher wants to publish a multiplayer game where players 2 through 4 can download a limited-functionality version of the game without charge so long as player 1 is a paying licensee and on their mutual contacts list. This resembles the model used by StarCraft spawned installations, single-Pak multiplayer on Game Boy Advance, and DS Download Play on Nintendo DS. I don't think all consoles support this sort of game sharing.