All I hear is "bla bla I do not want it bla bla bla and I an incapable if doing a config that does what I want bla bla bla and I do not even know whether the other thing fixes that". Seriously, listen to yourself! And then think for a second. OF FUCKING COURSE the screen lock process crashing will unlock the screen. There is NO way around that. Select an option the prioritizes security over pretty pictures and stop whining.
How un-American! Workers must be treated like slaves, must be exploited to the max and must be fundamentally disrespected!
That said, I agree. The only way to keep society going is less work-hours with the same per-person buying power.
No, there really is no reason to believe "AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years". There is not even reason to expect LLMs to be still a thing in 10 years.
That said, there is a pretty strong danger from SLMs (Small Language Models), which are specialized, small, efficient and where fundamental problems like hallucinations can likely be fixed by post-processing steps. These are much more like automation than LLMs are. And they can augment existing automation. SLMs threaten basically every no/minimal-decision-power bureaucrat job and for a lot of people that is all they can do.
"User hostile" captures it nicely. Add their blatant incompetence and one wonders how they are in business at all. Must be some Stockholm-Syndrome thing.
Do you even need to ask?
MS is probably not serous about actually doing this. Improving the user experience? That is not in character for them. What they want is "engagement", i.e. waste as much of your time as they can.
America works around this by rejecting "pure democracy" and ostensibly operating as a constitutional republic, while actually operating as an oligarchy. It means the people who make all the really important decisions are un-elected and loyal only to themselves, but also (most of the time, at least) in one of the upper echelons of the intelligence/education perspective and recognize that they need the economy to remain functional in order for them to remain in power.
It really does not look to me that this is what is going on at the moment. Before? Probably.
Your link - seriously?
"Tobacco giants say"? Dude, they said that smoking is actually healthy for a few decades. I'd trust my cat around buckets full of her favorite treat more than those companies.
Tbh I'm wondering if Trump purchased any intel stock beforehand.
Nobody is benefitting from this.
Nobody is benefitting from irrationality. In fact, it does extreme damage. Yet we have tons of it.
The problem is the people that fall for this crap. Too many voters with no brains.
The problem is the low education standards in the US. They clearly have them to keep their own population better under control, but they also make attacks like this much, much easier.
What if...
Someone (say someone who was familiar with doxygen and GCC) developed number of comment types, where some stipulated preconditions that must be true for the function to run correctly, postconditions that must be true once the function has run, kernel facilities that the function definitely needs, and kernel facilities that the function definitely doesn't need. These would all be optional for any given function.
A static checker could then validate if the code meets the behaviour expected by the programmer. This is precisely what is done in SPARK, a fork of Ada for high-reliability code. Combined with existing static checker capabilities, this would greatly increase the number of bugs that could be caught with all kinds of tools, AI included.
It could ALSO build a full fine-grained mapping for any fine-grained mandatory access controls system. You'd also want includes that you could import for precompiled libraries. This would allow someone to verify if the code was making unanticipated/undesirable calls but would also make SELinux possible to develop for at the application level.
It would not be trivial. If it was trivial, it would have been done simply because it already IS done in other languages and that makes it "obvious" to anyone who has been programming for a while. However, it should not be massively complicated, simply because you can use AI as the static checker. Once it has a definite set of bounda that must be satisfied, it should be much more capable of knowing what paths would violate those bounds. Which means that the checker stage essentially is trivial today, leaving only the markup stage.
Indeed. In fact, there are quite a few jobs you _cannot_ be good at unless you enjoy them. Basically all of STEM qualifies. Yes, I get that economics grads hate their jobs and think that is how it must be. May explain why they are near universally bad at it.
You are mistaken.
Using TSO is like kicking a dead whale down the beach. -- S.C. Johnson
