... for the low low price of a quarter peta-buck.

There IS a place for AI as a coding assistant. If used right by someone who COULD write good code from scratch AND who is well-versed in using his AI tools, it could actually save time.

In very limited problem domains, non-AI program-generators and LLM-"AI" program-generators can actually produce usable, correct, reasonably efficient code almost all of the time. But so could a reasonably competent programmer who was an expert in the problem domain.

In any case, using AI is likely to use a lot of electricity.

Old way for a small task an entry-level person could do in 2 weeks solo: a week to design, a few days to code, a few days to unit test

New way - "official/what you tell your boss": a few hours to design/decide what you want the output to look like and rough-draft your prompts a hours to "code"/prompt the AI, including iterations, and a few hours to test the results.

New way - "reality/what you actually do": design? what's that? a few hours to iteratively create prompts until you get output that "feels good," and testing the results - yeah, right, who has time for that?

Sigh.

9cc2ae8a1ba7a93da39b46fc1019c481

If only the very small percentage - possibly "0 plus epsilon" or less - of Reddit that was worthy of the term "expert advice" were used as training data, this could be useful.

But the odds of that happening are less than "0 plus epsilon."

... designing my workflow to avoid using this browser.

Ebiikes are a legal workaround loophole for motorcycles.

You realize there are a bunch of homes available for sale in all sorts of places for next to nothing. The problem isn't "housing", it is "housing where people want to live". Declining population in places like Italy have created housing collapse where nice houses aren't sold, and sit empty, and they'll pay you to move into one.

It isn't colonial, it is industrial. The current format of school is that of preparing for a factory workforce. We are post industrial, knowledge/AI/Whatever it will be called workforce.

Educators need to come to grip with getting EVERY child their MAX educational value we can. This means breaking the rows and columns of desks in a classroom, and getting kids their most valuable education they can get. This means some will do much better than others. Talent has gradations. Not everyone can be a Astro Physics expert.

Is it to improve understanding of the required, basic-standards subject matter?

Is it to provide an enrichment opportunity?

Is it work that literally cannot be done in school, like "interview your grandparents about New Years Day 2000"?

Is it to instill good habits that will be needed later when "all work is homework" such as college/university?

The answers to these questions will drive the answer to the question "how much homework should students have, and what should the homework be?"

"fair" is subjective. What you think is "fair" isn't really fair. It is objectively unfair to use qualitative terms in discussion of policy.

What would be fair, is that Government live within the means we ALREADY tax out of the public. Cut Spending first. Then, when all cuts that can be made, are made, then MAYBE we can have a discussion on tax increases.

Its Not Your Money.

Envy isn't a virtue.

The problem here, is "fairness" is subjective, not objective.

Use of that particular term is deliberate tug on the emotional center of brains. it works, which is why Progressives ALWAYS use it.

Which is exactly what they said a hundred years ago when they instituted the "income tax".

Rich people will move out. And take their wealth with them.

Taxes are regressive. All of them.

Just keep them away from your floppy disk and you'll be fine.

Conspiracy theories are, until they are not.

Secret Pedo island owned by rich dude with elitist ties was once a "conspiracy theory". Now we know that Epstein killed himself 100% because "They" said so.

"I'm just asking questions" idiots notwithstanding. I'm looking at you Candice.