I don't know why you think this is relevant to the discussion. If we get to a point where the Supreme Court is ignored, do you think the decision of some jury made of regular people would matter a damn? The nullification will be ignored, and the jury members would be lucky if they only get deported.

So the backlash is basically irrelevant. Even if valve can get some Linux hardware into people's hands the majority of operating system purchases for computer desktop and laptop hardware or for corporations and business and Linux does not have anything approaching active directory.

So they can ignore any complaints. Because realistically the average user can't do anything about it..

Meanwhile AI has the potential to replace hundreds of billions if not trillions of worth of wage labor. Remember AI is not a product for you. It's not even a product for your boss or your boss's boss. It's a product for the 8,000 billionaires on this planet who are sick and tired of the answer to the question "who's going to buy their products"?

Nobody. Nobody's going to buy their products because they're not going to have products. The goal is to dismantle capitalism and replace it with a new kind of feudalism.

Not unless you give it absurd amounts of computer power that is incredibly expensive.

AI is worth the money when you're replacing workers with it. But unless it can cut your headcount the cost of the competing resources exceeds regular computer software.

Right now I see it being used a lot to do reports nobody reads. The kind that used to be done by hand or if somebody's clever with a script. But if you have that kind of job you have it because you are somebody's head count.

I've said this before but conservatives are about to get a taste of all the efficiencies they keep clamoring for and they are not going to like it. The real thing AI is doing is letting every CEO know that there might be stuff in their organization they can automate.

And they're firing a lot of essential staff too. Really doesn't matter how important you are. It took me months to sort out a prescription because the company that makes it fired all their staff and replaced them with nothing.

We have hard evidence for the improvements to grades you get when you have free school lunch and breakfast. But we can't do that because the Christians won't let us. Specifically the evangelicals.

We could give parents actual support in raising their kids but every time anyone suggests that it gets shut down. Always by the think of the children crowd too.

Doesn't matter if you have the potential to be a useful genius if your parents are both working three jobs leaving you with a television set and no books and your classroom has 45 students in it 10 of which in the back have to stand because there aren't enough chairs and you had sleep for dinner last night and nothing for breakfast.

For about 30% of the country cruelty is the point and for the other 70% we're too busy fighting back against the damage done by that 30%.

This is some absolute drivel of an article.

The problem isn't that we aren't penalizing children enough. Anyone making that claim is just using cruelty for cruelty sake.

When my kid was in high school they had 45 kids in their class and 10 of them had to stand in the back.

We know exactly why kids are struggling. We are actively sabotaging public education in the hopes of privatizing it for profit and so they handful of religious extremists can indoctrinate children in private schools and a handful of racists are hoping they can sneak segregation back in using private schools.

On top of that we still have some leftovers from covid and the chaos caused from that time.

Oh and of course we don't feed hungry children because... I don't give a fuck what you're at reason is if you don't feed hungry children you're a fucking son of a bitch and you're going to hell. Repent already.

Everybody's about America first until it's time to actually put up some money and stop sucking billionaire cock. Honestly it's pretty fucking obvious that America first is just a code word for I don't want to look at brown people when I go to McDonald's. Because I have never once seen a person talk about America first and support free school lunches or probably funding public education or giving healthcare to disadvantaged children.

If anything they seem to get off on the suffering. Like that bitch Teresa used to.

It's OK, it's meant to be like that. To understand the text you need to rephrase it into its actual form:

This also sums up about... oh, about 100% of all other news stories where the word "quantum" is involved.

"It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of a son of a bitch or another." --Malcolm Reynolds

(Ironically applies well to Joss Whedon himself. Kind of wonder if one of the show writers was thinking about Joss when they wrote that...)

The only single-source point of failure is me.

In most cases neither EVs nor solar are terribly climate-change-motivated, they're just cheaper than anything else. For example I have several friends who are definitely towards the Fox News end of the scale who have lots of solar and several drive EVs, nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with free power and free runtime costs for their vehicle.

If you want to see what governments are really doing about climate change, look at COP30. And COP29. And COP28. And ...

Untrue. This derives from the GDPR and the GDPR requires informed consent for storage and processing of any PII. Cookies are not in the GDPR at all. They may be in directives, but only as examples.

Well, if you do not want basic human rights, that is, surprise!, a freedom you do not have. You get them even if you are dumb enough to not want them. For example, you cannot consent to be killed outside of very limited circumstances. And that is a good thing.

Newsflash: The "bureaucrats" did not chose any implementation. The GDPR does not mention any specific tech. There are no laws or regulations requiring any specific technology or implementation.

This is 100% on the web-tech industry which chose to select the most annoying implementation they could. They were in no way forced to do that. All that is required is that any form pf PII can only be stored and processed with informed consent and that behavior data is PII. And that is it. For most sides, they could have chosen to just not track users.

That is incorrect. These rules apply to anybody that does business with EU citizens or stores or processes data of EU citizens, even if that happens outside of the EU. Sure, if its is >99% non-EU citizens and just the occasional EU citizen in there and all business is in all aspects done outside of the EU and you never plan to ever do business in the EU, complaints will not be successful. But as soon as, say, an EU citizen can sign on to your website from the EU, you are affected.

What a load if insightless nonsense. The basis of all this happens to be Human Rights. That the EU does not (unlike the US) ignore those is a good thing.

No. The EU did nothing of the sort. The GDPR only (!) states that behavior data is PII and that storing and processing of PII requires informed consent. Period. The current mess is 100% on the web-tech makers. Specific technologies (like cookies) are not even mentioned in the GDPR. They can show up in legal decisions as to whether a specific technology fulfills the GDPR requirements, but that is it. The EU has made zero specific tech requirements.

The proposed changes are simply allowing more generic consent with less information. That is the only change here. And it is a bad change for the users because it removes control from them.