Operationally, what she experienced is not distinguishable by multiple counts of assault with deadly weapons, followed by false imprisonment (which, in law, applies for detainment of *any* duration).

All parties conspiring to create this situation should be held responsible (this includes you, Flock); IMNHO, damages should be in at least seven figures. Sovereign immunity should NOT apply.

(Note that for the record, "qualified immunity" is a Constitutional abomination: Article I, Section 9, Clause 8: "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States..." -- and one of the big deals with "Titles of Nobility" was immunity from prosecution.)

If you're going to repost the entire lede of the story, at least also share the counterpoint: "Gary Marcus, a reliable critic of the field, called the release amazing but vastly oversold. Some specialists expect that once the dust settles, a few of the ten will look genuinely surprising and the rest will be classified as reachable problems that nobody had gotten around to attacking."

And ironically, or maybe unironically, this story reads like it was AI-generated. Phrases like these:

"Three objections are worth taking seriously, and the honest reading concedes all three."

"Grant every objection and the structural point survives intact. Whether the ten were cherry-picked or not, the certificates still verify. A curated result that mechanically checks is a different object from a curated result that does not."

"The cost of producing a hard answer just fell to almost nothing, and the constraint moved to proving the answer is right."

Most humans don't write quite like that.

Copyright law is very strict on copyright ownership, very nearly as strict as real estate law: in the absence of "work for hire" (which doesn't apply here), a specific written-document transfer is required. It is also strict on creation of derived works (which is what's happening here).

META seems to be engaged in the creation of unauthorized derived works here, and as such should be subjected to such penalties as copyright law provides. All the way up to ex parte seizures of their computers for examination of the evidence (thanks, Scientology, for the precedents on that...)

Good points, but to be fair, ultrasonic is currently used to break up kidney stones because it is safe to use it to do so.

Plenty of trucks and other vehicles have little or any effective view directly out the back. To be blunt: If you need to look through your rear-view mirror to not kill someone, you either need better side mirrors or you need to learn to drive.

About 20 years ago, Boeing was sued about boot times and lost: the time-card system they were using required the employees first to boot up their desktops before they could sign in to the time-card system to record their work-times. FWIW

It hasn't been "autocomplete" in a long time. Sure, there's a training step based on a corpus of Human language, and the autoregressive process outputs a single token at a time, but reinforcement learning trains specific behaviors beyond merely completing a sentence.

Besides, the best way to write something indistinguishable from what a Human might write is to, well, "think" like a Human.

Well..

performance or yield, combined...

Are we, as a sapient species facing an uncertain prospect of continuence in a world full of rapidly-advancing bullshit going to learn from this catastrophic and absurdly predictable failure of information security, personal and professional ethics, civilian government, market economics, basic common sense, and consumer psychology?

Eight-Ball-Based-On-Cursory-Reading-Of-Literally-Any-Slice-of-Human-History says "no".

What do you say, and why is it also "no"?

This needs an anti-trust lawsuit.

Why should this not be a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act?
My eyes cannot deal with the "flyspeck 3" fonts used by smart-phones, and as I result I cannot use one. Can I get the statutory $15K per violation specified by this US law?

I suspect he doesn't know about - or thinks most people don't know about - ad blockers, and so offering a browser that has more relevant ads will attract people who hate the irrelevant ads but figure they're unavoidable.

Obviously, for those of us who are smart about adblocking, who almost never see ads we don't agree to see, it's stupid.

But shockingly, there are probably plenty of people who will happily sign up for that "improved" experience.

See https://scitechdaily.com/scien...

This means that the climate-modeler assumptions about the lifetime of free CO2 in the atmosphere are out to lunch.

I don't necessarily disagree with where you're going here, but can you elaborate on this:

I've worked at government contractors that had real air-gaps for things like their databases, but that does not seem to be the norm for the rest of the world. How would ordinary businesses make use of their databases if they are not network accessible under any circumstances, printed reports? Some sort of unidirectional transmission? What sort of data ingress are they using?

I ask this because I have been involved in the transfer of data in highly regulated, air-gapped systems, and they are incredibly expensive. Are you really indicating that true air-gap databases will be ubiquitous (or at least commonplace) in the forseeable future?

Not surprising - given the accident description, the pilots dramatically exceeded the structural limits of the airplane by dramatically exceeding the posted limits of safe operation.

Here's the report of the event:
https://asn.flightsafety.org/a...

It reads to me as if the (co)pilot deliberately amplified the Dutch roll motion (which is a simple lateral/directional dynamic characteristic of aerodynamics of ALL aircraft, whether or not it's operationally significant) until reaching such a large motion (probably a combination of simultaneous roll and yaw rate) that it exceeded the strength of the engine pylons.

In particular, it's possible to overstress the aircraft by putting in large OPPOSING inputs in an attempt to stop to the Dutch roll motion too quickly. It's quite possible that if they'd simply gone hands/feet off the controls, it would have damped out naturally with no damage. The failure of AA587 is an example of this: the pilot's large rudder input against the yaw motion (which was due to a yaw excursion due to unexpected turbulence) is exactly what caused the tail to snap.