They do work at the User Data Extraction Factory, after all...

And then technology just froze. No sensor components got cheaper. Computer vision stopped, as a field. Multimodal AI didnâ(TM)t get invented. Robotic hand technology development stopped. Robotic planning and error recovery did not progress. Time just froze, after McDonalds ended its robotic program.

Even if training is legal (and I don't concede it is), you still have to have a legally authorized copy to train from to begin with. Unless Meta paid for every book they trained their AI from, they're already guilty of copyright infringement.

They know exactly what I've bought from them and when, so computing the tariffs I've paid through them is a matter of database queries.

They know how to give the money back to me - they send me a credit based on my executive membership every year, and that would be an acceptable and minimally painful way to refund the tariff windfall. They could give Costco store credit cards to non-executive members.

Acting - as part of "the arts" - is more play than work for the people who do it. That merits not automating it because without enjoyable things to do, we become nothing but consumption machines.

Why should the movie studio executives, board of directors, or shareholders care? To them, it's a business to maximize profit. You can do that if using AI costs less than paying actors.

My take was: "Buddy movie in space."

It was fine.

Woz, despite his technical chops, had no influence after the Apple ][ days, so while he was initially influential, he hasn't been influential over most of Apple's history.

What if nobody implemented it?

Then Microsoft and Apple among others would be fined per day until they implemented it; or perhaps even being held in contempt of court if the government sued them and won up to and including jail time for executives; or given the current regime, being designated a supply chain risk.

Even if the companies eventually prevail in court, most wouldn't want the hassle or being on the bad side of Orange Man.

I know. My point is that all the site should guarantee to the advertiser is transmission of the ad. What happens to it once it reaches my browser should be irrelevant.

There are sites I like and do not block ads because I want them to be around, and in the end they either need to paywall or run ads to stay in business.

But the company whose ad it is has already paid to be shown on the site, hasn't it? Why should they care whether I choose to block ads via my browser? I'm never going to click on any as anyway.

For open source, merely copying the code is not copyright infringement. That is the point of open source. However, if you violate the terms of the license, then your right to copy vanishes and THEN it's copyright infringement.

If an LLM regurgitates your code verbatim (or really close so it could reasonably be considered a derivative work) and it's uncredited, then it's copyright infringement and also plagiarism.

Still, how could the US Government stop using Windows? They'd have to switch many tens of thousands of computers to Linux? The supply-chain list cuts both ways.

So? How much single threaded rendering does anyone actually do?

I understand why in some cases single threaded performance is important, but not for the vast majority of use cases.

What if Microsoft refused to stop using Anthropic's products? What's Hegseth going to do? Declare Microsoft a supply chain risk? Stop the US government from using Microsoft products?

There are COUNTLESS technologies and policies that could reduce the price of housing.

The issue is that we won't apply them. Or if we do apply them, we will do something else, to keep the price of homes up.

That's because:
* 65% of US householders are homeowners.
* 58% of homeowners vote. (contrast: 37% of renters vote.)

About 70-75% of people who cast a ballot are homeowners.

And they do NOT want the price of their house to go down.

Now on https://x.com/BoringBiz_/statu... you can see Donald Trump declaring to the World Economic Forum that the cost of houses are going to go up, and he's going to make sure that the cost of a house will go up.

This isn't a critique of Trump in particular. This is just how politicians have governed the price of houses for... for it seems like forever.