That is certainly one purpose for them. The stated use-case is to only employ them in case of emergency (general example is a kidnapping.) That's a valid use I suppose. The problem is, there's no feasible safeguard to ensure they are only every used for such noble purposes. And, especially with the rise of AI/ML/visual recognition, they could easily be used for general surveillance of the population before it became public knowledge and or controlled (whether by law enforcement or even outside actors.) So then we have a situation where we need watchers to watch the watchers, and watchers to watch them, and where does it end?

There certainly good be legitimate uses for the camera systems, but history has shown us that such a wide-reaching system will inevitably be abused, so we're probably better off not starting down that path and stopping it if we're already on the way.

But I do know the datacenters are coming, along with their power requirements. Nothing is likely to stop that. So we'd better make some decisions as a society. Either we let these Datacenters generate most of their own power, which the administration claims to be supporting, or residential utility rates will go up substantially. We don't live in a "have it both ways" world.

120 days. That's less than 1/3 of a year for those who are not good at math. None of that time was spent in the Legislative branch, so Musk spent exactly 0 years in any position to make law.

Wish I had mod points so I could give this +1 Informative, but I'll take it one step further. If you wanted to do business with the previous administration you had to have "inclusive" as part of your guiding principals to even qualify. It wasn't even about pleasing the administration, it was a requirement.

Of course it is.

Are you suggesting that Greed was invented in the 1980's?

Obviously not. Greed is at least as old as written history, and probably older than the human race (chimps are greedy too.) Blaming "greed" is a strawman argument because it is neither a novel nor solve-able problem. It is human nature, and thus we have no choice but to work with greed as part of the equation. Greed cannot be truly eliminated from our society.

I see. And who should said tax revenues go to? Unless you can answer that, and prove that's actually what happens with said revenues, taxation is not a deterrent. Instead it's just a grift.

The wires are local and owned by Liberty. The electricity is not local, currently comes from NV Energy but won't anymore starting May of next year. Liberty just needs to find someone else to supply the electricity, and in this case, possibly run new wires to where the new provider can connect.

I agree with others that TFA is mostly FUD. The Electrical provider is simply saying they're not going to renew their contract, which was expected by all parties involved. That said, in a lot of jurisdictions in the U.S., residents are required to hook up to the grid (along with related fees,) regardless of whether they need electrical service or not. Similar goes for water/sewer. This only helps the utility/transmission companies and is guaranteed income for them, but has little to no effect on the electricity providers. If someone want to go off-grid, they should be able to.

Speaking as a Conservative in the U.S.A., I agree. If the government funds it (and it's not classified for National Security reasons,) it should be open source, and that includes everything. Tech, materials science, pharmaceuticals, etc. Full stop.

No. When using company equipment, at any company with a reasonable Computer Usage Agreement in place, all data related to said company/equipment remains the property of the company. This is pretty standard, and could easily be construed as to include mouse movements, general usage stats, etc. It's not like companies aren't watching MS Teams or Slack usage of remote workers, and while workers don't like it, it's never been against any labor laws.

Bottom line, if you don't like the company's rules, don't work there. I suppose you can try to negotiate or unionize to negotiate or whatever you want, but Meta likely won't budge. They need the training data, and have clearly decided that it's worth more than whatever risk is associate with employees leaving, at least for now.

I haven't read the exact language the EU has proposed, but I suspect the goal is to get away from US/US Company controlled software, not so much code that may or may not have been written by US coders especially if it's open source. If Open Source, who cares who wrote it...just scrutinize it like you should any other code.

Yeah, were never intended to. That's why Authentication and Authorization are considered distinctly different operations. Linked in most cases, but not the same.

TFS specifically states that Chrome doesn't use this behavior, and only exposes one password at a time for time of use. Who knows how true that is, but is a critical difference in behavior.

If as described in TFA it would involve even more than that. IBM is touting the built-in scaling and load balancing capabilities of their platform. On any other platform that would be handled at the OS and/or application level, so you'd have to strip out all that architecture from the existing codebase and re-implement IBM's way. Just not a thing worth doing in most cases.

Agreed. It seems there are a number of security issues with this White House app (which I'll never install anyway,) but lack of pinning isn't really one of them.