If you can't figure out for yourself what's wrong with ordering large numbers of men to their deaths, then I won't be able to explain it to you.

They could take that one step further: once your computer has compiled the appropriate shader for its particular combination of hardware/driver/etc, the game could upload that particular shader to a repository, so that the next install with the exact same combination of conditions could just download it instead of having to duplicate the work. I imagine there are a lot of people out there running functionally identical systems that would benefit.

I suppose they don't do that because they don't trust people not to repurpose the mechanism as a malware vector, or something.

He's probably not scared enough. Anyone old enough to remember Vietnam knows how the song goes from here. "We must throw another batch of American men into the meat grinder, otherwise the lives of the previous batch will have been sacrificed in vain", and repeat ad infinitum.

Turning to AIs for a ruling on who is human and who is not is an interesting inversion of the Turing test.

It could be that. What it definitely was, though, is that Sony thought they could make more money selling to data centers than to the public.

Antiprotons, the forbidden PopRocks

Or some other Weekly World News cast member?

Totally agree with your apt comparison. Now, in the same vein, are message forums liable for statements made by its users?

Only the customers with fancy GPUs have anything worth farming, and they probably want to run games on them instead.

That's my gut reaction too -- this will result in software with obscure bugs that are near-impossible for a human to find or fix because no human even understands how the software works.

OTOH, maybe no human will need to find or fix the bugs, because they can task an AI to find and fix them instead. I'd say that strains credibility, but last year I would have said it strains credibility that an AI can understand (or, at least, "understand") human-written code as well as a human programmer, and yet here we are.

True, but I don't see how that's a problem for anyone.

For something that's too far away to be of much use, it sure is getting a lot of use.

I think you're confusing fusion with fission. A Mullah (or any irresponsible person, for those who prefer not to sound like a bigot) who has access to grossly abuse a fusion reactor might at worse damage the reactor and sprinkle a trace amount of radiation around. They certainly wouldn't be able to make any kind of weapon out of it.

One nice thing about cobalt and lithium is that they don't get consumed when you use them. When you drive your gas-powered car, the gas you put into it goes away forever, and you have to buy another tank next week, every week, for the life of the car. The rare earths in your EV's motors and batteries, OTOH, remain present and usable for the lifetime of the car, and can and will be reclaimed for other purposes after their service life ends.

So sure, there might potentially be wars fought over those elements; but it's much less likely to come to that, partially because manufacturers are learning to get by with less or none of those elements, but mainly because every nation-state that depends on them already has a de-facto internal stockpile that it can rely on instead of having to go to war for more.

If a free work is freely used to freely train these LLMs about freedom, what chance does a "free" foundation have against these AI giants?

ftfy

Don't get me wrong -- I love Linux and all free software, and think the FSF has its place. But, they went a little coo-coo with GPL v3 (Linus is right), and this situation just further illustrates their chronic hypocrisy.