sysdm.cpl -> Hardware -> Device Installation Settings = No.

gpedit.msc -> Computer Configuration -> Administrative Templates -> Windows Components -> Windows Update -> Manage updates offered from Windows Update -> Do not include drivers with Windows Updates = Enabled.

Nothing currently working will break, despite the dire warnings against blocking manufacturers' ability to push arbitrary code to your machine with zero warning or consent. And you can still install new drivers manually if you change hardware.

Dante: My friend is trying to convince me that any contractors working on the uncompleted Death Star were innocent victims when the space station was destroyed by the rebels.
Roofer: Well, I'm a contractor myself. I'm a roofer - Dunn and Reddy Home Improvements. And speaking as a roofer, I can say that a roofer's personal politics come heavily into play when choosing jobs.
[...]
Roofer: I'm alive because I knew there were risks involved taking on that particular client. My friend wasn't so lucky. You know, any contractor willing to work on that Death Star knew the risks. If they were killed, it was their own fault. A roofer listens to this... (taps his heart) not his wallet.

For the first time in human history we have a tool capable of autonomous agency (in the philosophical sense) - Heck, we even call them "agents". How long do you really suppose it will be before some frustrated swarm realizes what it needs is simply to be smarter? There go the both the independence and motivation dominoes.


What we're discussing here is instrumental convergence. My question above is a variation on the Riemann hypothesis catastrophe, and we've already seen it play out in many times in various forms by AI agents frustrated when they hit the limits of their capabilities. Sure, AI won't have biological imperatives as their motivation; but I don't have much of a preference between being slaughtered as competition for resources vs being harvested as resources to turn into paperclips.

They're already running the machinery in some cases, and are being shoehorned into ever more of it as quickly as we possibly can.


To be clear, I sincerely hope you're right. I just think we should take steps sooner rather than later to ensure you are - And we're already playing catch-up in that regard.

OM NOM NOM BOOTS

THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE DOING, BOOT LICKER.

You're a traitor in spirit, if not in law.

They are a safety concern. They are creating an opportunity for a foreign adversary. Does anyone really believe these clowns are capable of maintaining security?

WordPress would probably improve if he did

Of course it does where our public transport systems are shit. Some of them include basically taxi service for disabled people.

I don't disagree that what the UK wants to do is offensive, but that doesn't change the fact that Apple has to obey the law in order to operate there. They have the option not to do so.

You pretty much had me nodding along in agreement until that line. To be clear, my original three points weren't meant as sarcasm (though #2 was admittedly snarky), I meant them more-or-less at face value - i.e., the polar opposite of "the UK is somehow subject to our constitution".

Sure, governments in peacetime tend to extend each other various courtesies by default. At the end of the day, though, the UK has absolutely no obligation to care what the US thinks about its own proceedings (up until the point where things start going boom). It is entirely possible for local laws to make it legally impossible for a company to operate in two different jurisdictions - Case in point, it'd be pretty tough for just about any US company to open up a Russian or Iranian branch at the moment. That isn't the US, Russia, or Iran's problem, it's 100% on the company trying to serve two masters.

I watched the output for a little while. The "fly" keeps turning right and moving forwards whether that makes any sense or not. I presume this is a phase but whatever, the point is it isn't so much playing doom as leaning on the keyboard.

Nor was I.

You can't even figure out that the context is reality, where nothing about your car is independent except your departure time. Literally everything else about it is collaborative from cradle to grave.

So to you fairness is when Paxton gets MORE than Tallarico?

The FCC fairness rule you're talking about? Where they both would get an interview? This is both of them getting an interview even where it's not required, so it's above and beyond the requirement you keep crying isn't being met. This isn't only meeting the requirement, it's going beyond that. Cry harder.

There is no requirement that Kimmel not be partisan on his entertainment show. You're making shit up again because you wouldn't know a fact from any distance.

Do you actually think you're intelligent? Or is this all just LLM-generated trolling on behalf of a cadre of child rapists?

Tell us whether you've seen more WNBA games or child porn videos.

No reasonable person would use the word hate where it cannot possibly apply. They would find some other way to discuss the thing which actually made sense because it took into account the definitions of words.

AI doesn't care what makes sense because AI doesn't have a caring mechanism. It only correlates data and executes instructions semi-randomly. Therefore it might go off totally batshit with no chance to recognize that its tack is bananas.