This is really no different from many other areas in which you can have conflicts of interest. For example, sports! And the answer isn't to ban betting, it's to ban betting by people who have a conflict of interest. This is well-trod ground.

I'm not particularly a fan of Kalshi or Polymarket and don't really care if they exist or not. My point is just that this isn't really any different from anything else.

The biggest clue that he hasn't read the books -- or maybe just doesn't remember them well -- is that all of the books and stories were built around demonstrating ways in which the rules failed. The 0th rule is only one example, and far from the clearest.

Solar + Wind + Battery doesn't require water, and that is what Google is planning to use. I did some searching and found that they've funded additional buildout of a large renewable generation plant (solar + wind + battery) in Gujarat, plus transmission lines to bring the power the 1100 miles from Gujarat. The Gujarat plant is already in progress, the government is investing $70B in it, and it's a particularly good area for renewable generation because the seasonal wind cycle is exactly opposite the seasonal solar cycle, so as the days get shorter and solar generation declines, the wind ramps up, and vice versa.

You fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of my proposal. The purpose of my proposal is for AI agents to tell web sites "you are gaming the system, we are going to do whatever it takes, no matter how inefficient, to make sure you don't."

A correctly written, correctly-implemented "human filter" would render this invisible to the AI.

It's principle, not principal. AIs are not my pals.

Have the chatbot remote-control a regular web browser, do human-like scrolling taking enough screen shots to capture the primary content, then run the screen through optical-character recognition using a "human filter" so it will only "see" things that a human with normal vision would see.

In practice this is much easier said than done. But if web site hosts insist on gaming the system, this is one way to counter it.

I see you've never been in one.

Google and Waymo have explicitly and repeatedly said that they are fully liable for accidents caused by their vehicles.

You're the one claiming it's well-known, but you are unable to provide a single link.

Figures.

Worth it for what? If the answer is a different financial motivation, then it's just a different form of corruption.

NONE of them have done this, not in 250 years. Not until Trump. Presidents make a lot of money after they leave office, yes, especially in recent decades. They command incredible speaking fees (Obama famously got $400k for one speech), they write books that make millions, etc. There are lots of people who are willing to give them money to get close to them, get their advice, etc.

But until Trump, none of them has used the office of the president to make money. No one else has sold pardons. No one else has set up a public stock and a memecoin to facilitate billions of dollars in bribes. No one else has brazenly sold insider secrets to stock traders.

Trump's corruption isn't just new in scale, it's a completely new thing that the United States of America has never before seen. We've seen plenty of corruption elsewhere in government, at all levels, but never in the oval office.

Just for context, when its predecessor RIPA, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, came in it was said to be used only for cases such as terrorism etc.. Instead, it was found that councils started using to check people were putting things in the right rubbish bins for collection.

Robust safeguards indeed.

At least for me and many others I spoke to.

Go and use books to train AI.

Just don't fucking destroy them afterwards! Many of these are out of print, impossible to replace! How much of a douchebag do you have to be to destroy them ?