"The only question in my mind is if Kamala would have started dropping the bombs sooner or later."
Sure it is. Maybe Trump will improve your talking points later.

"Kamala was all "Yea! War!" so maybe she'd have not done it?"
Citations please.

"One is to start/continue wars behind an orange retard. The other is to start/continue wars behind some brown bitch-retard."
Sure, both sides. Super original. Which "retard" worships Putin? I mean, besides you.

"Kinda finding it hard to see any real difference"
Sounds like a you problem. And how did Kamala Harris become part of the conversation? We all know, of course.

"Do you want those announcements from some dumb bitch you would not let operate a can-opener by herself or some angry ancient orangutan-looking asshole who you'd bet against putting his pants on by himself?"
Not being a raging misogynist like you are, the choice is clear. I prefer not to have a 34-time felon, rapist and child molester threatening genocide of nearly 100M people as my President, we know what you prefer.

"Great choices, partisans. Lovely situation you've both-sides'd us into."
Wait, who's doing the both-sidesing? You have us mistaken for those "retards" you are so familiar with.

I always dislike the nostalgia for the Classic. When brand new, it was already nostalgia bait and seriously under specced for the price. The original 9" Macs I really like, worked with and owned as a retro computer (I owned a contemporary LC). The Classic I always thought was a cash grab.

Colour Classic...yeah maybe, and again as a retro machine I like them. As a contemporary machine though they were way overpriced for what they were.

"...while maintaining the existing overall parity between the bad guys and the worse guys."

In reality, probably yes. But it is conceivable that a "last vulnerability" could be closed and "overall parity" would be broken permanently. The problem is that the bad guys continue to add new vulnerabilities for the worse guys to use, and that will likely accelerate with the proliferation of these very tools.

That is a remarkable take, and not in a good way. Not defending AI, just appalled by the disrespect for finding and fixing vulnerabilities. Finding vulnerabilities is a core part of closing them, it doesn't only matter when an attacker does it.

A lie is bad information provided intentionally. AI does not have intent.

Still, Slashdot doesn't have to play along with their weasel wording. For example, "ergonomic collars that deliver an electric pulse" - just say "shock collar". Don't help them whitewash what they're talking about.

Silicon Valley.

What's interesting is that this article leads with "Peter Thiel". Why? It's just standard VC stuff.

"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
Linux literally is "repeating the past". Its very name is derived from the designs it copies.

"No year will ever be the year of linux on the desktop with this stupid attitude of throwing working code away."
LOL no, that's not it.

Or iPhones?

"And we are just letting it happen because why the fuck not?"

Who is "we"? You? Are you letting it happen?

"...our love of moral panics and knee-jerk reactions."

Like your post?

I have not seen AI code that is *more* efficient than human code, yet. I have seen AI write efficient, compact code when pressed, very, very hard to do so, but only then. Otherwise, in my hands, and those of my developer colleagues, AI produces mostly correct, but inefficient, verbose code.

Could that change? Sure, I suppose. But right now it is not the case, and the value system that is driving auto-generated code (i.e., the training set of extant code), does not put a premium on efficiency.

Web browsers are absolute hogs, and, in part, that's because web sites are absolute hogs. Web sites are now full-blown applications that were written without regard to memory footprint or efficiency. I blame the developers who write their code on lovely, large, powerful machines (because devs should get good tools, I get that), but then don't suffer the pain of running them on perfectly good 8 GB laptops that *were* top-of-the line 10 years ago, but are now on eBay for $100. MS Teams is a perfect example of this. What a steaming pile of crap. My favored laptop is said machine, favored because of the combination of ultra-light weight and eminently portable size, and zoom works just fine on it, but teams is unusable. Slack is OK, if that's nearly the only web site you're visiting. Eight frelling GB to run a glorified chat room.

The thing that gets my goat, however, is that the laptop I used in the late 1990s was about the same form factor as this one, had 64 MB (yes, MB) of main memory, and booted up Linux back then just about as fast. If memory serves, the system took about 2 MB, once up. The CPU clock on that machine was in the 100 MHz range. Even not counting for the massive architectural improvements, my 2010s-era laptop should boot an order of magnitude faster. It does not.

Why? Because a long time ago, it became OK to include vast numbers of libraries because programmers were too lazy to implement something on their own, so you got 4, 5, 6 or more layers of abstraction, as each library recursively calls packages only slightly lower-level to achieve its goals. I fear that with AI coding, it will only get worse.

And don't get me started on the massive performance regression that so-called modern languages represent, even when compiled. Hell in a handbasket? Yes. Because CPU cycles are stupidly cheap now, and we don't have to work hard to eke out every bit of performance, so we don't bother.

Certainly those who make that claim. A bell curve looks like a bell, not like a triangle.

No conversation cannot be improved with more bigotry, right MAGA?

With the rise of MAGA, it seems there is more than that. SuperKendallism is pervasive.