It's just a silly idea. Especially given how it's usually implemented, where they depend on a manufacturer's “cloud” to work. I don't need “smart lights” that turn on using Wi-Fi; I go to the switch and simply turn them on. I once for fun thought about developing a refrigerator that would warn me when something inside was about to run out or expire, but... After seriously analyzing the case, I concluded that it is much simpler and more reliable to just go to the refrigerator and check it myself.

Translating what the article really meant.

OpenAI spent a fortune on flawed technology, spent even more hoping that the fix for the flaw would be to spend even more (probably the idea of someone in marketing or someone who is in the computer field but recently dropped out of a week-long course), and now that the bill is too big, it hopes to be “bailed out” by the government like the banks were, trying to argue that it is as important as the banks and therefore cannot be allowed to fail.

This has been happening here and there since Slashdot was sold to the media group. If you haven't noticed, it's probably because your comments are so irrelevant that they don't justify the hassle.

I said no as an answer but slashdot deleted my previous answer, I assume they don't like people who go against the AI hysteria.

RAM used for cache and RAM actually used by applications are completely different things.

The first is acceptable because it's usually disk cache that's immediately freed for use by other applications, while the second - when in excess - is usually a symptom of poorly programmed applications. Pay attention to the Windows memory manager, which shows how much memory is being used in actual cache and how much memory is being used by applications.

... to see how many here FAILED to understand the point of the TFA.

Let's turn RAM into dollars to see if it makes it easier to understand the fucking point of the article: You have, say, $320 available. And you only need $3 of that to do the job you need to do. Why, for all the creatures of darkness, do you think you have to use all the $320 to do the same job just because you have $320? Is it because the $320 “is free” so you should use all of it? When out of the $320 available, you only need $3 to do the job?

Just because you have 32GB of RAM available doesn't mean you should waste it! And every mentally challenged individual who says, “Oh, memory is free now” should first be burned alive and then dismissed from any and all tasks vaguely related to programming.

Greed causes blindness. All these companies believe that AI is the new get-rich-quick scheme, like a gold rush or the old and famous case of Dutch tulips.

Not really.

What I have noticed happening in recent years is a tendency to replace the company's leadership and management. Removing the people who actually know the business and replacing them with generic idiots or sociopaths, who don't know shit about the company's business but are really good at making the company owners believe that they are “essential to the company”.

And then it becomes difficult to work at these companies because, since these generic “CEOs” don't know jack shit about the company's business, they start giving absurd orders on top of absurd orders to the point where the company ends up going bankrupt or becoming so bad that it would be preferable to go bankrupt. Then your work environment ends up becoming toxic. Because your colleagues (and you) start to get stressed out by meaningless orders and restrictions imposed “because that's what the market wants” (Only the CEO thinks that), imposing increasingly difficult goals because the generic “CEO” completely believes that they are perfectly acceptable (remember that he doesn't know shit about the company's business) and starts cutting the budget where he shouldn't “because that's what the market preaches.” Of course, when the company ends up going under, it's all the fault of “the employees who didn't try hard enough to do their part,” while the “CEO” gets a golden parachute to go after his next victim.

What are you going to do next, give him surgery to widen his hips? Complete facial surgery so the "woman" doesn't have a grotesquely ugly face (because he's actually a man)?

Unless you can come up with a complete body swap, all you'll end up doing is horribly mutilating someone whose identity crisis would probably be easier to treat with a psychologist or a psychiatrist, and all this in the name of a panacea you can shout about all you want is still insane.

If I knew, I would tell you.

You missed my point: Real women can bear children, men who think they are women cannot. I have no problem with people adopting children but that is not the point of this situation.

There's no such thing as a "transgender woman". What you have is a man with serious identity issues who needs psychological help, and the worst thing you can do is reinforce his crisis by agreeing with him about "being a woman" (a falsehood). It's like the guy claiming to be Napoleon and you agreeing with him (a bad, bad idea). You can even try to force the situation with hormone treatment, but this guy will never be able to have a biological child (adoption doesn't count).

And again I see this silly argument to justify that there would be more than two sexes. Genetic defects don't count.

Your comment is so lunatic I don't even know what to say about it. You know, this is exactly the same thing as those people who claimed to be Napoleon and were confined to psychiatric hospitals for their own safety. That you can believe with all your might that you are Napoleon and still that doesn't make you Napoleon.

Let's stop this insanity, okay?

That's the problem.

First of all, NPN itself is a piece of junk, the "cool guys" (teenagers who think they know how to program because they managed to glue together a few bits of JavaScript) have the terrible habit of pasting everything and the kitchen sink as dependencies, even when you could (or should) write the code snippet you need yourself and thus avoid adding another 1MB of JavaScript “libs”. It's how they arrived at this absurdity of any simple application literally needing thousands of dependencies and good luck checking each one for possible vulnerabilities.

The other big mistake the “cool guys” make is ignoring backward compatibility. They are always redoing everything without any concern for what might depend on the libraries they create, and if you “old dinosaur” question this, they arrogantly respond that you're the one who has to find a way to keep up (never mind that the reason for so much compatibility breakdown is because the "cool guys" don't actually know what they're doing, so they have to redo everything over and over again until they maybe get it right by accident). That's why applications that make the mistake of using these libraries end up having to “freeze” versions, because otherwise they quickly stop working.

And the biggest mistake, in my humble opinion, is linking these applications to libraries on external servers, even directly to repositories such as GitHub. This basically opens the floodgates to attacks such as those described in the TFA.

Every time I have the displeasure of seeing a project with hundreds (literally) of javascript dependencies where you don't have the slightest chance to check whether each of them is safe to use in a timely manner, I completely agree with you.