Most of the time I see iPad junkie toddlers their parents aren't addicted to the iPad. They may be at fault for enabling that behaviour, but they quite often are not addicted themselves.

Heck my neighbour owns one iPad: for the kids. They've never used tablets for anything other than to numb their kids by filling their faces with Bluey while they go and attempt to do normal adult things. The society normalising bit here is that parents expect life to go on as normal when they have kids, and not have to give up anything to do actual parenting.

The problem is that it is more difficult to ban the platform itself within current regulatory frameworks (and that's before we talk governments simping for big tech).

Banning minors has legal precedent that has been set through legal systems throughout the past century, and some adults (in some cases rightfully so) would question whether the government's role is to make personal decisions for them (something that minors lack the maturity to do).

So yeah, it doesn't address the root cause, but it's about as good as anything is going to get in the foreseeable future.

Err, yes, literally they are destroying culture by buying and destroying original and rare books in a way that isn't preserving them either on paper or digitally.

Your* brain couldn't get 4 characters into the insult without fucking up. I wouldn't be throwing shade on anyone if I were so incompetent.

Is profit the right word? We're talking about a system that is netting the companies involved billions, in some cases multiple digit billions of losses on a yearly basis.

Maybe "the delusions of profit" should be the correct term. How much are you paying Google every time Gemini gives you unsolicited response to a search query?

There's a reason we call AI a bubble. Just like in the dot-com bubble a lot of it is built on a fantasy with no path to profitability.

I think the concerns about water use are largely misdirected. The question isn't whether datacentres will suck us dry (they won't), the question is whether datacentres are using the water in a meaningful way.

Irrigation and agriculture are the largest users of water, but I get to eat the output.
Thermal generation is also one of the largest users of water, but that keeps my lights on.

What does an AI datacentre do for me? Generate a picture of a kitten to help me feel better while a read the news about our current drought?

That said AI exclusively isn't the problem. We're mismanaging water all over the place, but for AI we're doing it for objectively stupid reasons, at least bitcoin farms were aircooled.

Datacentres in the last 30 years have been nothing like the datacentres proposed now. We built more datacentres in 2025 than we did in the preceding decade. The current planned datacentres in the pipeline will quadruple the number of datacentres WE HAVE EVER BUILT. Datacentres also used to be small, yet there's 3 datacentres currently being built that would consume more power than the largest USA power plant. Think about that for a moment.

I really hope the only "performative" thing here is your ignorance.

Yeah who doesn't like increased costs in a world where the cost of living is a key concern for more than half of America. I mean it's not like we just went through an election where they key topics were the cost of living right?

Not only do we live in the dumbest timeline, you just proved we live in it with the dumbest people too.

Yes I will double down on things that you are obviously too busy applying extreme autism to than thinking about it logically. Take your meds and join the conversation like a normal person who doesn't frame everything with an extreme viewpoint.

Then you're even more wrong. The model output is the subject of the person using or distributing the copy. Always has been and we've endless case law about this.

If you want to use a pencil to draw the mouse, Disney can't sue you. If you distribute that picture or sell it, then you'll be in a world of hurt. You'll be, not Faber-Castell, not your highschool arts teacher, you.

The output of AI is irrelevant until you do something with it.

That's completely irrelevant. It would also be irrelevant if she was complaining about English students rather than math students. The act of learning has always had different requirements than the act of doing and executing.

In grade school we teach people how to add, subtract, multiply and divide. Once they have LEARNED that skill, we give them calculators. The act of learning provides understanding.

Put that to the real world: Do you want an engineer designing a bridge when they don't understand the underlying concepts and how the formulas work? That engineer will almost certainly not be using those formulas by hand, they'll be using software for it. But having gone through the process of manually doing it at university allows them to understand how different variables impact the output and when the software tool gives completely stupid responses.

No it's not. Using a tool during the course of teaching is not the same as using a tool during the course of learning. There's a reason we don't give kids in grade 1 a calculator and ask them to first understand how to add numbers together.

The entire article is stupid ragebait for stupid people who have ceased applying any thought to the world around them.

I don't want a car the use of which is dependent on me gluing my shitty phone onto the windscreen. I don't want a car where I need to squint at a tiny navigation screen to see where I am going next. Everyone here talking about touch screens vs buttons are missing the point. Both can exist, and when they do a larger, easier to read screen is infinitely better than a small hard to use one.

Even better than that would be proper functional HUDs, Mazda have something approaching this in the new Mazda 3, but so far I've found it lacking in every car.

Which company can you state is *blocking* your view? Sidenote: are you 4 foot tall? If so sorry.

I've driven a lot of new cars (i rent them frequently). I've never seen a single one where the touch screen extends beyond the top of the existing dash and obscures any view.

Basically never? The vast majority of the car industry, including "first party" car parts are not designed, manufactured or have their life spans dictated by the car manufacturer. And even if they do the world is full of a wealth of 3rd party parts.

e.g. Siemens stopped manufacturing the crankshaft index sensor for my previous 20 year old car, it took about 10 minutes to order one from China. GM stopped manufacturing the hydraulic hoses (with a special custom connector) for my dad's old convertible. He found replacement quickly (and better quality than the GM rubber/plastic rubbish). He actually did this twice because GM thought it was a good idea to have a metal roof hook engage a plastic tab in the car, the workshop said "the GM part isn't available, but we have found an after market part that is a clone and it's metal!" My nextdoor neighbour has an aftermarket laser headlight in his BMW as well as he wasn't prepared to pay the couple of thousands that BMW wanted for a first party replacement.

Car parts are available providing cars are available. They disappear when the cars hit the scrap heap, not when the manufacturer gives up, and often there's even a car in the scrap heap with the right working part for you.

I don't want to be rear-ended by you squinting at a tiny device you shoehorned into your dangerous driving experience, so I guess we both can't win here.

I'm with you on the buttons though.