What would happen if Oracle went down?

I guess they would be asset stripped and their software treated like VMWare is treated by Broadcom - basically only companies that got incompetently trapped would stay on it and they would have to pay massively more just to get much worse service. Oracle DB itself is going down for sure. Amazon can definitely migrate companies off that without huge problems. Oracle's business software can be replaced by SAS consulting and so on?

I guess that it's time for people that earn by supporting Oracle to start running.

The cameras do go on sale quite frequently so some people go absolutely bonkers with installing several of them. I would assume there's probably a lot of overlap in the Venn Diagram of people who share their videos on social media and people who cover every square inch of their property in cameras.

Generally, you don't want your camera configured recording every time your neighbors leave/come home, because the extraneous motion alert notifications are a nuisance. The software lets you adjust the areas of the field-of-view that you want monitored for activity, and there's also various sorts of wedge mounts for the doorbell cameras to angle it so it's not pointing up into the street.

Ring certainly wouldn't make implementing something like that easy out of the box, since their system is closed and proprietary. I'd figure if someone really to be a creep and do AI recognition to log everything their neighbors are doing, they'd probably have to roll their own camera setup. It's a bit like the situation with AirTags, too. They technically could be used for stalking someone, but they're also the worst way possible to go about doing it (since they will literally cause an alert to pop up on person's phone that they're being tracked, and the tag is linked to the stalker's Apple account).

You continue to be without insight. Nothing new.

Exactly. Which is why a lot of his stories are about how the three laws fail.

Also note that any actual implementation of the three laws requires AGI and we do not even know whether that is possible. We certainly have no approaches that could realistically lead to it, despite what some people hallucinate. It is not a question of throwing more computing power or data at the problem. We are missing some key ingredient.

Probably need to add
22. Turning the US into a Kakistocracy.

Trump lost a lawsuit in the UK against some off-shore wind visible from one of his golf parks. Since then he (and the MAGAs) hate off-shore wind. No rational reasons, just mindless hate by total losers. The less dumb ones try to find "arguments", but it is all lies.

The reason you do off-shore wind is that it is not intermittent. It can have very rare and entirely predictable non-wind situations, but in practice these are comparable to other forms of power generation. On-shore wind is different, unless it is high-wind. If you go high enough, on-shore wind becomes reliable as well. There are some experiments running in Europe for that.

DT is exceptionally stupid. He has savant syndrome and can do two things well: Turn people about as stupid as he is into loyal cult followers and escape being held responsible for his crimes. And that is basically it. And I would like to point out that the second is probably due to him being born rich.

Honestly less than I expected. For comparison what does something like a Camry or a Golf or more standard cars cost?

The problem with your "analysis" is that you have no clue how to analyze this type of thing. And hence hence you are ending up with nonsense and do not understand where the specific problems of a specific installation come from. No, just looking at power generated is NOT enough. You basically make claims that need expertise on PhD level and you clearly and obviously do not even come close.

So, maybe not flamebait. But a nice demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger effect far-left side of the graph.

That is not true for off-shore wind. This is the very reason you try to build wind off-shore. Yes, there can be down-times. Yes, they are predictable. No, they are not much worse than for other forms of power generation. And most if them are due to maintenance, not the wind not blowing.

Let's just game out how divesting would go.
1. Chrome is bought by another megacorp (e.g. Microsoft) and is then equally used to screw over users.
2. Chrome is bought by a medium-sized company that fails to recognize the level investment it requires and they make bad choices or sell it to someone else.
3. Chrome is bought by a small company that MUST make money from Chrome and adds a bunch of shitty stuff to it and Chrome starts dying.

The best outcome you are going to get is Chrome dying a slow death and most people fleeing to other chromium forks which likely mean Microsoft absorbing most users. Given what they have written about why to divest, it seems they are hoping for a nonexistent possibility where greed is not the driving factor.

The US cannot. That should tell you something about what kind of future the US has. Also note that nature protection laws in places like the EU are generally not weaker than in the US.

I have attempted to address the point you have put forth. If you feel my response did not address your point then contemplate the possibility that your first comment simply failed to articulate your point in an effective manner that communicates your idea. You are free to try again.

LOL! What's funny is that in addition to various bacterium, we also have trillions of bacteriophages in us in addition to the other viruses we carry. Like bacterium, bacteriophages/viruses are also everywhere. The human body contains a whole ecosystem of tiny things feeding and killing each other.