Nope, except occasionally by accident. They find things like use-after-free, which is so simple even "gcc -fanalyzer" finds them. LLMs cannot do complex reasoning.
OK, so either the entire linux kernel team is a bunch of utter morons who can't run a "simple gcc -fanalyzer" on their code, or YOU are full of shit. Hmmmm, I wonder which one of the two options is true.
Did it not occur to them that a lot of the demand for robotaxis would be from folks too tired, ill, drunk, or stoned to drive themselves or take public transit? This shouldn't be a surprise.
I have to wonder if the geniuses who started these services ever consulted cab companies and drivers before the fact to have a better understanding of what they were taking on. I'm guessing that they didn't, or maybe they just didn't listen.
Maybe they DID anticipate these things and just said "Fuck it - let's move fast, break things, and externalize the cost 'cause that's what we do best.
Explain to me: how exactly is this the fault of taxi company, not of the person who got stoned and passed out? And if he passed out on a pavement somewhere it'd be the fault of owner of the pavement? Yes, there is externalisation of costs going on, but it's drunkards externalising the costs of their addiction (which somehow is perfectly acceptable by the leftists), not taxi company.
That's a particularly sad little straw man even for Slashdot.
What we know for sure already is that AI use is correlated with impaired knowledge accumulation and transfer. It's poisoning its own well.
And calculator use correlates with worse arithmetic skills, therefore you should always only get accountants who do all their numbers by hand.
The real question here is: do you want a doctor who has spent the time and effort to become an expert that can use tools appropriately, or a quick graduate who knows how to interface with llama.cpp running kimi whatever, which will be what you'll get in 5 years from now.
Yes, we all know that as soon as we ban AI this magical thing will happen when all the quacks, morons who haven't read a single paper in decades, and all those who just don't give a sh*t about their patients will magically become perfect doctors overnight. Just do it damn you, what are you waiting for!
Because that I would do.
Isn't there a rule about the government not delaying economic impacting information to the general public?
That is, isn't this illegal? Or is it just that no other presidency thought of doing this particular cash grab?
Maybe you dems should have made one when you were in power. But of course then you'd also have to abide by it, and think of what that'd do to NANC valuation!
Are bickering like children in public. At a certain point you take the gun away from the children. That gun is the stupid amount of money that they have. You don't have to take the gun away from the child but you don't get to complain when the kids shoots you. In this case the metaphor means they are going to load your 401K with bogus crap stock that's going to collapse and you're going to be working until you drop dead.
How are your SpaceX shorts going? You know, you kept whining that the IPO is a scam and it'd crash immediately, so I presume you put your actual money where your mouth was, to make rich in the process? Or, oh, wait, I know, you're "too moral" (LOL) for that XDDDDDDD
Yes, and that "something" is levying a fine, one carefully designed to be as high as possible, but not high enough that Apple will actually change their behaviour
The fines have demonstrably caused Apple to change their behaviour based on multiple EU regulations. That includes even hardware like how you charge your device. You may not notice if you don't live in the EU but here's some examples for ignorant dolts like you: * Apple has changed the fee structure for digital revenue. * Apple has allowed 3rd party payment processing for iOS apps * Apple now allows web downloads from within apps. * Apple now allows payment redirects from within apps.
You'll note I said "designed to" not "always succeeding at what they were designed to". Yes, yes, I know, too much nuance for a leftist. Yurup is still a pathetic continent that earns more through fines paid by US Big Techs than by taxes paid by their own.
Trump isn't tariffing you enough.
Nothing says stupid like thinking that the tariffs are the answer. But sure EU is evil, so *you*
But but wait, I thought you leftists said we should all feel privileged and overjoyed to give more money to TEH GUBBERMINT (*reverent bow*), also that "taxes buy civilisation", and whatnot? So just think of it as more taxes (good thing! Yay!), just on Yurup goods. As a side effect it skews the market for more local production which I thought leftists also agreed is a good thing? You know, ships carrying goods, burning bunker oil, making Gaia cry and so on, when those goods could be produced locally? Oh, no, wait, I forgot, how silly of me, Trump, of course it's evil.
Imagine: You own a shop which is the ONLY place where people can buy parts for their car. When a competitor wants to sell parts as well, they need to go through YOUR shop. Because it's your shop, you ask companies who want to offer products via your shop to pay 30% of their revenue to you. They are also required to use all your other services. When you notice someone has a good product, you start offering the EXACT same thing, but cheaper.
In what universe is this called fair? It's a good thing the EU actually does something about such behavior.
Yes, and that "something" is levying a fine, one carefully designed to be as high as possible, but not high enough that Apple will actually change their behaviour, instead just writing it off as a cost of doing business. Pathetic continent which literally without exaggeration makes more money from shaking down US Big Techs via fines like that, than from taxes paid by their own. Trump isn't tariffing you enough.
Wasnt a backdown, was a payment.
I'm assuming you have proof of this? Other than "it would fit my preexisting biases perfectly"?
with the government "approving access customer by customer during this preview period,
Remember the days when Republicans said the government shouldn't be picking winners and losers? Maybe that's only when Democrats are in charge
I also remember the days when YOU were perfectly happy with govt doing exactly that. Oh, that was when Democrats were in charge.
None of this money has their name on it. Even if you're a billionaire, you depend on the infrastructure and institutions that make it possible to own thing and spend money. Property ownership in a vacuum is not possible, you have to have a civilization around you to recognize that ownership.
LOOOOOOL, whaaaaat?
Well, newsflash: a billionaire does NOT depend on - what? "infrastructure and institutions"? to be able to own stuff, YOU do, just like you depend on the state for your medical care, food stamps and so on. A billionaire just buys all of those things, from food, through services, down to security in his possessions via hiring private army and becoming a local warlord. Believe me, his armed goons will have no trouble getting you to - what was the phrase you used? Erm, "recognize his ownership" of anything he wishes, without any "civilization" involved. And that includes the stuff that "civilization" would recognize as yours, not his, because why the hell not.
You leftists and your quaint ideas like "civilization is a gift from the society to the billionaires that they should be eternally grateful for"
Your sentiment is a common one, right before a major crash... not because you're wrong about technology's advance, but because you're conflating that with a self important meritocracy that only exists to make hoarders feel better about what is ultimately mercantile parasitism.
The idea that an economy 'doesn't need to be fair' as an excuse for hoarding is hilariously self defeating. Economies run on the movement of capital.
You know where I read about these concept first? When I was a kid, I read this little ol book called "The Wealth of Nations" by an obscure Scottish economist named Adam Smith. Maybe you've heard of it... it certainly doesn't seem like you've read it.
"hoarders" do not need excuses, it's their property, they're free to do with it whatever they like. YOU, the one who wants to take their stuff and "distribute it to the poor (meaning yourself)" need excuses.
The problem is AI data centers and a complete lack of antitrust law enforcement so nobody is going to risk getting into RAM or storage manufacturer even though there's half a dozen companies that could be up and running in 6 months to a year. Several of them have had their CEOs interviewed and just quietly hinted that they wouldn't take the risk. They usually talk about the bubble but the underlining thing that they will hint at but never outright say is that they all know if they enter the market the existing manufacturers will just drop their prices long enough to put them out of business. Don't get me wrong nobody is a saint here one of the reasons why none of these companies are pushing for antitrust law enforcement is they want to be the ones committing antitrust and violations. Several of them are in their own spaces. So none of these fuckers want to see the government come in and clean things up because they are all crooks. A drug dealer might like it when a cop busts their competition but they don't want the cops coming around in general.
LOL, you really have no clue how the economy works, do you? In order to drive anyone out of business, you not only have to lower the price of your product, but you have to be able to saturate the market with it. As it is, RAM manufacturers could be giving away all their production for free, and there would still be demand for more, and people willing to pay a fair price for it.
No protections? If a company kills people generally those running it are legally protected. If a company goes bankrupt the owners once again are protected from debtors going after their personal savings earned while running that company into the ground. If a company commits fraud once again you can sue the company but not those running it. This isn't about bailouts. It's not even really about economics. It's about corporatism. No corporation should have more legal power than any citizen. Corporations also don't go to a version of jail, think about that. Instead of labeling those you don't agree with, use that time to think about what you read.
LOL, you really have no clue, do you? Go ahead, try killing someone and then claim immunity because you did this while on the clock. Same for bankruptcy - if it was abolished all you'd have to do is just set limits of liability and write down seizable assets in every contract, but there's nothing the state provides that can't be reimplemented.
LOL, another leftist who has no idea how economy works. Here's a hint: the state offers jack shit in terms of protections. If a company goes bust, it's its debtors that foot the bill, not the government.
You mean, like the banks in 2008? They got no government assistance and all went under
So you're arguing that bank bailouts are a proper function of the government and we should keep doing them? Because standard capitalist procedure would have been to sell them off, and use the money to partially pay off the debtors, and I'm wondering whether you're too stupid to know it, or are arguing in bad faith by pretending that what happened was the "capitalist" way.
Administration: An ingenious abstraction in politics, designed to receive the kicks and cuffs due to the premier or president. -- Ambrose Bierce
