I expect that will be a major part of it, but I can see a few areas where AI might be genuinely useful without compromising existing jobs as much as some fear it could. For instance, creation of storyboarding options, replacing modelled and scripted CGI for greenscreen production, creating location shots/B-roll, tweaking existing IRL backdrops to add additional features (e.g. the manipulation of actual shots of places like Dubrovnik in "Game of Thrones", or Valencia in one of the later seasons of "Westworld"), as well as some of the post-production tasks like colour grading and the like.

If they're going to prioritise things like script production (which would almost certainly be deritive because that what AI does) and a reduction in headcount on both sides of the camera (quite likely, given this is Amazon) in order to churn out an even larger pile of mediocre dross for the same total budget then I can easily see that backfiring as the genuinely decent shows could easily end up getting lost in the noise.

The people running these services are essentially re-broadcasting paid-for content for a fraction of the price.

That's quite probably not all they are doing. Remember, if it's too good/cheap to be true, then *you* are probably the product or, in this case, your bandwidth and IP address.

Pardon the cynicism, but I remember Google claiming that they would "do no evil", yet here we are. I'll enjoy the ad-free Claude while it lasts, and hopefully that will be for a long time, but sooner or later I fully expect the desire for advertising dollars to trump any laudable claims they might be making today.

Brexit is a factor for sure. The UK's economy has generally underperformed compared to its peers since the result was announced, let alone the actual exit, but it's definitely not the only factor. It also overlaps with the decision to increase the minimum wage and various inflation busting public and private sector payrises which, while maybe warranted, also have the flipside of increasing costs and that is often clawed back through headcount reduction. That's particularly noticeable in the hospitality sector which always runs on thin margins and has been hit pretty hard; AI isn't making beds and prepping food. Another factor would be all the uncertainty over the US, one of the UK's largest trading partners, putting a lot of focus on business development elsewhere and that doesn't yield results, let alone jobs, overnight if you don't already have a foothold to build from; I'm seeing a *lot* more Brits at overseas BD events than 12-18 months ago because of this.

I know we like to hate on AI a lot here, but while I'm sure it's contributed to shifts in the job market it's incredibly disingenous to claim AI is responsible for the entirely of the UK's current employment woes, and frankly I'm not even sure who would really benefit from making that claim. Companies using it as a convenient excuse for layoffs because of other reasons on the otherhand... Yeah, I can totally see that.

I think a home charger is more likely for Pwn2Own. Winning an L3 DC fast-charger is cool and all, but it's not likely that the successful hacker is going to be able to do much more with it that use it as a garden ornament or oversized door stop, unless they offer a cash alternative, because things like DC fast chargers should absolutely be subjected to this kind of thing just as much as the typical consumer tools that make up most of the targets.

A cybersec seminar I was at last yeaar had a speaker from a major pen-testing company describing how they had got a L3 DC EV charger setup into a Faraday cage to see if it could be exploited (they didn't state which make, before you ask, presumably because they are in active use, but they did say that the charging network operator was their client, which is not necessarily the same as the manufacturer of the equipment, so I'm guessing probably NOT Tesla). Turns out these things were a comms nightmare, and despite the fact that they often have to have buried HV cables due to their location on the forecourt, they use wireless data links rather than hardwiring then via a secondary LV cable duct). This is broken down into:

Usage/payment processing. You'd expect this to be secure because of standards like PCI-DSS and because it's a glorified version of those remote card terminals you see everywhere, so a known tech that has been audited over and over, and that was mostly true - they couldn't get at the payment info - but they were still able to interfere with it and create a DoS and extract an awful lot of PII from users of the charging pods sent from their phone apps.

Management. These things often sit out on a forecourt, but there is usually also a management terminal located somewhere onsite showing status info, etc.. This proved to be woefully insecure, and they were able to send bogus data to the management console, and get it to show whatever status info they wanted, which is important because of the third data network.

Power supply regulation. When installed in a group, the chargers "chat" amongst themselves to optimise the distribution of the available power from the grid when the bank is close to maxing it out so that you can have a car arriving with an almost flat battery prioritised over one that is already 80% full, as well general management and heat regulation through redistribution of supply current so that nothing gets too hot. Turns out this was woefully insecure too.

By the culmination of their exercise, they were able to combine the hacks and were able to both take arbitrary charge pods offline, fiddle with the power regulation to generate potentially dangerous current draw scenarios, and simultaneously present the operator dashboard with information indicating that everything was just fine. While some of that did require opening a panel and connecting to a USB debug port in one of the pods, with a variety of vehicles parked up and a pre-attack recon of the CCTV setup, I suspect it wouldn't be too hard to engineer things so that one of the pods was hidden from the cameras long enough for you to attach the required cable and replicate the attack in the wild.

That's what I love about these things; the Striesand Effect factor. As usual, all the targetted domains are listed in the linked complaint (the PDF at the start of the second paragraph of TFS) starting from page 11. Now, I'm pretty sure some (probably most) of those domains are malware infested hellholes, but one thing you'll note is that they almost all list alternative domains with different registrars to prevent this kind of domain takedown from knocking them completely off the web and let them spin up replacements. The smarter operators will already have a few "spare" domains registered, just in case. Let say - since they are mentioned in TFS - Togo complies and all the ".to" domains go dark; how long do you think it'll take before replacement domains spring up, including on the .to ccTLD?

Hollywood et. al are *still* essentially playing whack-a-mole after all these years because they have nothing new to try (kinda like much of their content), and even if they get some token results from this, it's still going to be about as effective as all their previous attempts. The mole ducks down, and pops up again somewhere else.

HDDs are still the most cost effective solution for large storage arrays that don't need particularly fast random data access, although putting an SSD in front of the drive array to act as a cache can make even some of those workloads viable. I think the issue has been more that the size of the array where that becomes a significant enough cost difference to offset the "screw it, let's just go all-in on SSD" has been increasing rapidly.

For instance, it used to be that media creatives would have a SSD for their go-to / work drive and a high-TB HDD or RAID to store the bulk media data, but - at least until AI blew the market apart - unless you were either seriously budget-limited or producing a vast amount of raw content, then a lower-spec high capacity multi-TB SSD or two was a potentially affordable option. In high-end server land, it was similar; you were spending so much on things like per-core software subscription licenses and however many chassis full of CPUs/RAM, that the storage uplift from HDD to SSD on the drive arrays (excluding the stuff that really needs to be SSD, like VM image storage) is largely a rounding error for PO approval until you get up into the 100s of TB or even PB range. But again, then along came AI...

I suspect a lot of people with upcoming hardware refreshes and large SSD drive arrays are going to be taking a good hard look at how much of that data *really* needs to be on SSDs until the AI bubble pops. It might be a bit of a last hurrah for the tech, but the next few years could be very good for distributors and other bulk suppliers of HDDs if those reviews go the way I expect.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at. Subtract one number from the other, and you get the profit on the movies from theatres - after all the usual Hollywood math has been applied. That's a few points in the black, which is fine by some metrics, but is still only for the movies made since the original trilogy, so my main point was that it doesn't seem to include the profits coming from other areas, which are going to make the RoI for Disney look a lot better overall.

Point taken on the level of success on the movies alone though. Ignoring all the other income streams from the franchise, that's still a pitiful amount of RoI for a franchise with a reputation and loyal fanbase that should have ensured every single one of the movies landed in the top end of the highest grossing movies of all time list if they'd even been remotely decent. I doubt Disney are going to be unhappy with the results, but equally they are probably not as happy as they probably hoped to be when they bought LucasArts.

It's not the best phrasing, but that's just on the box office (after "Hollywood Math" has been applied), and it's a profit which is as far as many people will need to read. I'm pretty sure once you add in the TV shows for overseas broadcasts and people who subscribed to Disney+ specifically for them (less their production costs), all the license costs for all the toys/collectibles/video games, etc. produced by third parties, and all the other ways Disney rakes in money from the franchise it's even more financially rosy for them.

Because it becomes more cost effective to use less environmentally-friendly alternatives that produce more CO2, like coal, instead of natgas.

Profits > somewhere healthy to live. One of the many "Fsck you, I've got mine!" mantras of unfettered capitalism - it's almost like they're trying to come up with their own version of the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition...

So you have the truck equivalents of Marine Pilots, combined with an airport "drop and go" style parking system. The autonomous truck arrives at the lot, parks up in the designated assigned at the gate or whatever waiting bay, or queue, and when there's a loading dock ready, the "pilot" manually drives the truck the last few 100m.

Besides, while it's certainly possible that all the loading docks might be in use, if you have a "complete jumble of trucks", then that's a fairly major yard design failure and major safety issue since anyone on foot will need to content with trucks coming any which way. Surely any one with the slightest clue would come up with a layout with a suitable combination of one-way systems, a suitably sized overflow lot laid out like a holding park at a ferry terminal, and a whole bunch of clearly marked safe walking routes. Arguably, the pick a dock and arrival time issue shouldn't be a problem either - modern cars are some of the most connected devices of all time; what makes you think any autonomous trucks will be any different? It wouldn't be that hard to come up with a system that tells in an inbound truck that there won't be a bay free for 30min or whatever, and to slow down a bit on the highway to delay arrival accordingly, or just go around a suitable block a few times.

So, ~4,400 satellites that are now going to be a little over 10% closer to Earth. That means they are also going to be ~10% closer to each other and moving across the sky faster as well, and therefore the light trails they leave across the sky in long exposures will be even more densely packed.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of ground-based telescope using astronomers suddenly cried out in frustration and were suddenly silenced.

It might just be profiteering, but beside a little RAM they do contain other ICs which, like RAM chips, are all made on wafers. Any fab capable of turning blank wafers into ICs that is interested in turning a profit (e.g. ALL of them) are going to be prioritising those lines with a higher profit margin (RAM/GPUs/NPUs) and ramping up costs to match demand. That is eventually going to create a knock-on supply/demand problem for other chips that are not in high demand to fuel AI startups as well, and as supplies of those chips run low, that will drive thier prices up. Combined with tariff/export tit-for-tats, these kinds of supply issues were starting to impact the automotive industry some months ago, so it shouldn't be surprising it's now expanding into other sectors.

Asus is a big company, so probably wasn't entirely based on a "just in time" supply chain. If they are running low on parts inventory and that lack of supply of general components is now starting to bite, then we're going to see similar price rises from other vendors fairly soon too. If so, then I'd be preparing for hardware pricing to spike across the board before the AI bubble pops and making "buy now or wait" decisions accordingly.

The analogy you want is "handbags". Leica makes some very capable cameras but, like Hermes with handbags, they realised a long time ago that they have a very devoted following that is willing to pay an awfully big premium for that little red badge, and thus started the seemingly endless chain of Leica's "limited edition, collector's models" and then, inevitably, along came the copycats. Kudos to them for finding a new business model in a shrinking market, I suppose. Anyway. Like the top handbag fashion brands, functionally they are not much better than the equivalent product from any random high street store, and although quality is often better (but not always), you're mostly paying an awfully big premium for the "right" badge.

The purpose is the same, too. It's not just, or at all, about the photography, or having something stylish to carry your stuff in; it's about being seen to be on trend (usually because some random influencer/celebs was recently photographed holding one) and having a lot of disposable cash within the right set. You know what else all these cameras have in common? They are compact enough to fit easily into an expensive handbag ready to be brought out on a moments notice whenever the paparazzi show up.

Who cares, as long as the company that doesn't need that group of workers in 6 more years pays their 1% and the re-training cycle repeats? Well, at least until everyone has been downskilled into menial work at minimal wages; typical peasant labour doesn't generally need all that much training.

As always, when people propose things like this, the first thing to do is follow the money and figure out where is that "1% for retraining" is intended to go, and it doesn't take a genius to realise a lot of it would end up going to companies like the Khan Academy. Not exactly the most subtle bit of shilling for self-interest's sake, but still better than some of the far more blatant "do this (and give me money)" sales pitches we've had of late.