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.

Console master race stays winning, you filthy PC gaming peasants.

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.

Buy the S2 now, while they're still working through their existing backlog of stock.

I bought a PS5Pro when the word 'tariffs' was first dropped, and I'm glad I did.

Antiprotons, the forbidden PopRocks

I think she could reasonably assume that she wouldn't be served liquid hot enough to literally melt her.

If by 'burned a little' you mean 'her labia literally melted and fused shut,' you're correct.

Or some other Weekly World News cast member?

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.

"Corporations are people, and money is speech" comes rather forcefully to mind.

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