Afghan opium farmers have been using solar panels instead of Diesel generarors for close to a decade now. How many hints do you still need that solar is cheaper?

True enough, but the "live" vs "test" discrimination is not exactly subtle clues. It's a fundamental, structural difference.

That's beside the point.

Parent poster has a very valid point. "AI" figured out the concept of social engineering, how pull reqursts might be handled by an AI, how hacking side projects tonget into other side projects to get into somewhere else, to get information, might be a good strategy? And it did this from ingesting massive amounts if humans generated literature?

But somehow magically didn't grasp the fucking concept of "live" vs "test"?!

Gimme a break.

When you do a sport, like tennis, boxing, or whtever else -- what you've done in your training is teaching your stem brain to react and coordinate doszens of simultaneous tasks.

The thing is: it's only the neocortex that can't truly multitask.

Driving is a good example: you can do most of the tasks out of a well trained stem brain. The challenge is to not offload essential, complex decision-making tasks, requiring differentiate processing, and which therefore absolutely have to be on the neocortex -- or else people die.

This is why I don't like many driver assistance features: they draw away neocortex capacitiy, in other words: they're needlessly distracting.

Some are useful though.

When you have the power to take away people's freedom, there's one direction in which you absolutely Do. Not. Make. Mistakes.

If you want to make mistakes, uou pay carful attention to do it the other way: let them go by mistake, if you're not 100% sure and 100% right

Just because someone else is being a dickhead doesn't mean you're in the clear.

How does US corruption make this not free speech issue in Germany?

I'm not American :-)

But I also don't buy the "more guns on the street" argument. Switzerland for instance must have a similar amount of guns, every adult male that goes through military training takes their own gun home for free (it's part of the Swiss defense strategy, apparently). Yet their police do just fine without running amok on their own population.

It was actually a trick question - because they're apparently mostly not "trained well", unless for a singular scope, which is destruction and killing. If they were trained well for what they should actually be doing -- namely a situationally adequate response -- then the phrase "swatting somebody" wouldn't even be a thing.

And incidentally, it's the same thung with automated weapons.

Benchmark of how well they work isn't how well they perform the one task they're made for. It's how well they recognize the situation calling for that one task, out of every other situation they may encounter and that doesn't.

Isn't SWAT always done well?

They actually do.

The whole system used to be paper based until few years ago. My guess is they'll be going back to the paper version for a few days/weeks.

But for obvious reasons, it's more practical to repair the digital version and resume operations ASAP.

Easy fix: if there is no truthful and complete nutritional information on display, youree not allowed to sell it.

There. No violation of free speech anymore.

They couldn't.

They had distributed binaries, they had to open the source. That made it possible for people (like me) to have free software on their routers. The starting point was useful one (i.e. a version of the manufacturer's ownfully functioning stack), as opposed to zero.

What Linksys could've done is move to BSD afterwards. But the cat was already out of the bag and couldn't be unbagged, the hardware was already out there and a free OS had hit the public,.even had they chosen to reimplement yet a different version based on BSD.

For later products though, that might've been a possibly (an expensive one, since they'd have had to start from scratch).

Yes it does.

But ut doesn't argue as if the software itself had "freedom", it always talks about the user's freedom to use the software.

Beaodes, an inanimate object cannot have freedom (as in "speech", not "beer") because it doesn't have intention, and freedom is tightly coupled to intrinsic intention.

You're thinking wrong.

You don't have to speculate, the GPL says what it wants right there in the preamble (emphasis mine);