1. You don't get speeds up to 2.5 Gps easily over several hundred miles without relay stations.
2. To intercept a laser signal, you have to be right in the beam. The same applies for jamming. Cloud cover is a problem for visible light, but not for infrared light.

It seems to me they could redirect the 10 figures a year they are spending on building a VR world no one wants or will use. Or did they cannibalize that already?

No, it's a serious suggestion.

I'm puzzled why it is controversial instead of obvious.

Yes, an AI model training on AI output will be more entropic than Anthropic. But there's no eating of one's own tail going on here... Just one AI trained on good data going about classifying, responding to and otherwise pre-processing data generated by other AIs.

  Gmail uses AI filtering to bin AI-generated spam. As does Apache Spam Assassin (Bayesian classifiers, etc).

Make AI be the drain. Have AI review AI-generated bug reports , classify them against existing big tracker entries, respond, bubble-up real issues, etc.

Maybe setup another 'AI mediated security list' that has agents and their human masters merrily chatting, and that bubbles up real issues to the main security mailing list.

When I see switches like this, I think ..

'Indefinitely Free'. Charge may come anytime. Stay alert.

Like with Tesla: 'Mostly Autopilot'. Crash may come anytime. Stay alert.

I'd rather use the default OS app password manager or setup rsync. Just so I don't have to stay alert about yet one more thing.

Are they doing '100 points of ID' or just checking email?

We get it. You don't like Beyonce. Neither do I, but I'm not making a scene over that fact.

Grading on a curve was meant to hide the fact that some teachers couldn't teach, some could, some wouldn't, and others would. It protected the professor at the expense of the students' education.

And it ruins grades as a marker of achievement or ability. From a student's perspective, if I pay for a course, the result should be that my grade reflects the degree to which I've mastered the material, not the variations between the quality of the students and the quality of the instruction. Grading on a curve allows a deadbeat professor and a deadbeat class to essentially turn the class into a credential mill without the necessity of education.

Students can safely assume that courses graded on a curve are staffed by incompetent or lazy professors, taken by lazy or incompetent students, or quite possibly both. When I was in university, this type of grading was used most often in the general education electives, where the professors didn't really care about the students, and the students didn't care about the subject. To adopt the same approach for mainline courses is to transform the entire university from a place of learning into a credentials broker or diploma mill.

It depends on the complexity... Safety matches are an ultra-simplified procedure. I was taught to use flintstone but have forgotten how to.

The human body produces things like acetone, cyanide and bleach - but does this in molecular amounts and carefully compartmentalised enclosures.

Around 1990, I worked for a couple months on an embedded device that had an 80186 and a megabyte of RAM. At one point, I had access to a huge pile of 1MB SIMMs and took a stack home for the evening and using memory boards that allowed you to stack up to 8 of them into one SIMM slot in your computer to figure out just how little RAM Windows NT 3.5 really needed to boot. It booted successfully with 12MB of RAM. It really wasn't usable, but it did boot up. Nowadays, Windows is probably only marginally usable with 12GB of RAM.

With respect to being a "lying snake," this is the C-Suite, not rank and file employees. When it comes to the C-Suite, such behavior is generally accepted, if not expected, and hardly a reason for firing.

I mean, can you even name the last time a CEO was fired for lying?

The biggest problem with replicating CUDA is not the technical aspects, but finding VC with enough brains to know whom to hire. Most CS grads have the knowledge, but not the drive. Most liberal arts grads have the drive, the creativity, but not the knowledge. You need to find one with both, because creating the next Nvidia killer will require someone who is boring enough to reinvent the wheel, but has enough creativity to find novel solutions to performance problems.

The computer science and hardware engineering behind the hardware and software (Nvidia/CUDA) have been known for decades. The Nvidia hardware could be replicated with FPGAs - notwithstanding any patents Nvidia might have. The software API could be replicated rather easily; parallelism has been known and studied in computer engineering (again) for decades now. What Nvidia did was political - they provided both the hardware and the API to easily use it in one package which could be understood by the C-Suite class. The challenge was never technical, but marketing.

More specifically, you'd need to understand how compilers work, and how to use YACC or bison, or something similar to generate the compiler code for you. You'd have to understand digital logic and how to create logic functions with NAND gates. If you see an FPGA development kit, know what it is, and think to yourself, "What I could do with that..." you're probably a good fit for the job. And you'd need someone willing to bankroll your project until you could demonstrate that you beat Nvidia on something marketable - like floating point performance. Or power consumption.

From an engineering standpoint, what Nvidia has done is trivial - because the solution could be reproduced by an engineer using already known techniques. But what Nvidia did was to combine technical knowledge with an understanding of their market to produce the dominant position they have today. Any computer engineer worth his diploma could produce a design with FPGAs that would beat Nvidia GPUs, but Nvidia did it first.

So even hackers can be replaced by AI now? What is this world coming to?!