The batteries would have to be specially designed to fit in the 3d print. 3d printing by itself is both slower and more expensive than injection molding (unless it is a small run). Throw in custom batteries are you are probably making the items 10x more expensive for a moderate sized job. Economies of scale might work for something we are making in the tens of thousands.

LLM predict what responses a human considers to be normal. It does not tell the truth, it does not have a memory of what it has done, it does not think logically.

The real problem is that the use of the Flock system is cheap. If the cops had to pay $1,000 per search request I guarantee that a police officer would become a gate keeper ensuring that each and every request was valid.

You also have to give them achievable parameters. "You are always responsible" is not realistic. In some cases someone else is, in fact, responsible. And that's the rub of regulation, not that I think this means we shouldn't regulate, but it's going to always be true that doing it well takes effort. You can only ever reasonably expect that people are moving forwards (at best) and doing what is reasonably and humanly possible, and hopefully advancing the state of the art. Determining whether or not they are doing that is inherently complex.

Make "Buy", "Own", and "Sell" reserved for actually owning something rather than licensing.

Require the use of words like "Rent", "License", and "Borrow" when we are talking about licensing things.

After all when you pay a landlord a monthly fee for the use of an apartment nobody says you bought it, own it, or it was sold.

Similarly, we need to require IP businesses to follow the same conventions.

That's how it used to work here in the USA. Then the subsidies were terminated in favor of forcing students to get loans. Then a US senator led a campaign to prevent those students from discharging that debt through bankruptcy. That senator's name was (and is) Joseph R. Biden.

The boomers got the handout. I don't want anything they didn't get.

I don't expect to get it. I do expect to immediately discount any bullshit from the hypocrites who got it and think I shouldn't get it.

You didn't get it, and you're insisting nobody deserves it because you didn't get it, which is sad. You're sad.

OK, how do we provide this feedback? The article is chock-full of links, but not one for that. It gives strong "get fucked" energy.

Since it's not worth putting out the effort to figure out where to submit some comments they definitely won't give a fuck about anyway: In no way is it a "first class" anything when it's only for GNOME and only in a snap. Let us know when it's ready for prime time so we can test it out and decide if we care. There's a 0% chance I'm going to use GNOME or snap.

Yes.

So you moved the goalposts and declared victory? Good work, clown.

HFDWHhwHAHQAHHAHAHAHAHHAHa HA HAHAHHAHAHAH ahHAHAHAHAH HA AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

You are either an AI bot, a paid propagandists, or an uneducated fool. Not paying for something is not the same as denying you the right to do it. The pay wall is not insurmountable. There are lots of cheap colleges that cost less than $5,000 a year.

Federal scholarships are not the only source of scholarships. States routinely offer them (and there are states that hate the liberals and states that hate the conservatives). In addition there are LOTS of private charities that already offer scholarships.

Also, the schools already deny the people the right to an education. You try getting into college if they deem you below their standards.

Finally, you are a damn fool for thinking we should give them to everyone. Why this would be a bad idea:

1)Such an attempt would not only be doomed to failure by the Republicans, it is the kind of dumb ass thing they use as propaganda making all liberals look foolish.
2) It would be too expensive. There is only so much money to go around.
3) Some people fail out of college already, if all went then it would be a massive waste of money.
4) College is not only used to educate the population, but also to grade them. We need ways to tell between those that are good people but not highly qualified and those that are highly qualified. While we could use their GPA, it is much easier to just ask "is she a college graduate?"

I believe education is a right for all, but we also have the right to choose who we help with our limited assets. If you can't convince another to charitably pay for it, you should have to earn the $5000 per year to do it yourself.

But this only works if it is relatively easy for both the 10% smartest and the 10% who came from literally nothing but still did well in high school can get educated without crippling themselves financially.

The difference is that it's not mass transit. It arguably should have been regulated more though, because and only because it cost The People money to chase after the dead.

We really should abandon the Student Loan idea.
1) It is not reasonable to expect people that by definition have NOT had a college education to make good decisions about student loans. Some of their parents may have collage degrees, but not all.

2) They are long term loans that cannot be refinanced. If interest rates rise, the borrowers make out like a bandit. But if they fall, they get screwed.

3) Scholarships are better ideas.

Why scholarships are better:

You can quite easily pick the person who really needs it and/OR the person that most benefits from it.

You can get much stricter on which education institutions qualify for them. This will end a bunch of scams, such as the schools that if graduate from get a $60,000 per year job but cost $900,000 to go to.

You can put in grade requirements for continuing them for next year.

Scholarships fight educational inflation, while loans encourage it. If schools know the main government scholarships only pay Y on average, they will have immense pressure to keep their costs below Y. The government can easily set the values of the scholarships to discourage inflation because they do not want to pay more.

But banks will always be willing to increase the amount they loan to the students. To them, the cost of education is a GOOD thing because larger loans means larger profits.

Your solutions don't solve anything. e.g. "The department can't evade the bits they're actually able to do" means only that the argument will be over what they are able to do.

It still can be, if you've got a couple hundred bucks.