Reddit might have a good complaint about terms of service or CFAA or something. I don't know. But at least one part of their complaint looks like garbage:

7. Congress has enacted laws to prevent exactly what Defendants are doing:
circumventing or bypassing technological measures that effectively control access to copyrighted
works. See Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq. Each of the Defendants
in this action is profiting by evading technological control measures to access Reddit data it
knows it does not have permission to access or use. Because Reddit has always believed in the
open internet, it takes its role as a steward of its users’ communities, discussions, and authentic
human discourse seriously. Through this action, Reddit seeks to end Defendants’ circumvention
of security measures protecting Reddit data, blatant misuse of Reddit content, and disrespect for
its users’ rights, all of which harm Reddit and its hundreds of thousands of authentic human
communities.

Ah, DMCA, my old friend. Let's review some DCMA definitions from 1201(a)(3), but I'll add some emphasis:

(3) As used in this subsection—
(A) to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and

(B) a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

It is here that I must mention that I happen to have a reddit account, and I am somewhat familiar with that website. And I never, ever authorized any technological measure to limit access to my posts/comments. That doesn't mean reddit can't do it, but reddit never asked me and I never authorized it, so whatever is being circumvented does not, therefore (by DMCA's own words), "effectively control access to a work" because the technological measure was never authorized by the copyright owner. I suspect that no reddit users have authorized this, or at most, only reddit employees have been ordered by their bosses to authorize it.

Furthermore, how do we know that the copyright owners don't authorize anyone to "avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure" their copyrighted works? I authorize people to do that. (Indeed, my Slashdot sig below, is a reference to that.) I don't think I have ever said on reddit that I authorize it (the way i have done here on Slashdot) but if anyone (reddit?!?) ever bothers to ask me...

There seems to be some popular misunderstanding of DMCA, that it prohibits cracking DRM. But that's only true if the copyright owner authorized the DRM in the first place and also if they don't authorizing cracking it. Neither of those two required conditions apply in this case.

Or you know, build robust apps that don't have one cloud provider as a single point of failure.

This wasn't a root dns failure of TLD servers, so it wasn't by any means an unsolvable problem.

But that takes effort, and to be fair, if the company cared about reliability, they wouldn't be on AWS anyway. Not that AWS isn't generally reliable, its a great service for many things, but when you outsource everything to someone else because its hard - and don't understand that you're still actually responsible for the 'hard' parts - well thats on you and its why you should have done it yourself first.

The shit you outsource to AWS is actually the EASY part. Putting all that stuff together into a working architecture is and always has been the difficult part. Keeping rack servers running is a pretty well understood process at this point, its not hard to keep racks of running computers, it just takes people who know how to build your automation and understand that time is more expensive than cpu cycles.

"It takes four hundred thirty people to man a starship. With this, you don't need anyone. One machine can do all those things they send men out to do now. Men no longer need die in space, or on some alien world. Men can live, and go on to achieve greater things than fact-finding and dying for galactic space, which is neither ours to give or to take. They can't understand. We don't want to destroy life, we want to save it!" - Dr Daystrom

If you ignore the plot of the episode (where M5 is doing buggy shit and taking Daystrom's sanity with it), I think his speech sums up my outlook on technological progress pretty well. If somewhere, someone is toiling, that's an error to be corrected. In a weird way, creating the fat slobs of WALL-E is, in fact, the goal. (Though for some reason, I prefer to picture Hedonismbot from Futurama as my true ideal.)

As for how to solve the resulting "finally, we can all afford to be fat slobs, so now we are all fat slobs" problem, I dunno, someone else can worry about that. ;-)

My oldest was born in 1999 and the hospital sent us home with a list of foods that we shouldn't introduce to our children until they were three years old. I remember this because both peanut butter and honey were on the list, and one of my favorite foods is peanut butter and honey sandwiches. I have six kids, and I got in trouble quite a bit over the years because I gave my infants bits of my sandwiches.

What can I say, they liked them...

It's a bit funny to me that I was actually right about that particular call. Most of the times that my wife and I disagreed about something I was definitely the one that was wrong.

Most new parents don't know anything about raising children, and even the worst parents are pretty motivated to do a good job. New mothers, in particular, are desperate for solid advice on what to do with their new child. My wife isn't keen on reading the instructions for any purchase that she makes ever. No matter what it is that she buys I am the one that has to read the instructions and teach her how the thing works. That was true with our children as well. However, she made me read every pamphlet that the hospital sent home with us when our babies were born dozens of times over. If she thought I was interpreting them incorrectly she would wait a bit, cross examine me again, and force me to show references. If one of those pamphlets would have said that the best way to insure that the child grew up healthy and strong would be to murder the father and sprinkle his blood over the baby by the light of a full moon then I probably wouldn't have survived the first full moon after my daughter was born.

Someone in the medical community decided that the best way to protect children was to keep them away from certain allergens, and they put that opinion into the pamphlets that get given out to new parents. I am sure that the people that came up with that strategy meant well, but in they theory was proven incorrect.

Just because the police are interested in someone, does not mean their reasons are just. We have lots of stupid laws, there's no reason to help the police enforce drug laws, or (here in texas) abortion laws. There's no reason an APB should be out on some girl trying to flee the state to get an abortion after she got a positive test and some stupid religious fuckwit nurse broke all kinds of laws to report her. Definitely no reason your ring camera should be used to help identify her going to the person who lives across the street from you who offered to drive her to New Mexico, and then that person is tracked by every flock camera between Austin and the border.

Or perhaps you were suspected of being a protestor in No More Kings day, and the ring reported on your whereabouts, We're calling such people domestic terrrorists these days. You personally could never be forced to testify against yourself, but your ring camera could.

And that's just official law enforcement. Flock is a Peter Thiel gamble, part of his ever expanding private global espionage platform. Maybe you told one too many pooh bear jokes on the internet and Xi decided to have you offed. For a price he can know where you are and what your routine is.

The only time you should be giving Ring data to anyone but yourself is if you need to report a crime to your property or the people within. You should be in a position to volunteer it, or at the very least require a court order.

Hanford announced last week that their spent fuel vitrification plant is officially in operation, converting nuclear waste into glass ingots that can be safely stored for millenia. If they keep going for about a century they might be able to vitrify the spent fuel we already have. But we still have no place to store the ingots.

All these small modular reactors have the same deficits. They require high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) produced only in Russia. They're a proliferation risk. They require a substantial footprint with passive and active defenses, 24/7 armed security, security clearances for all the highly paid professionals involved. They're slow to approve, finance, build. They're more costly even than classic nuclear reactors to build and operate, and those are the slowest building and most costly form of energy which means high energy costs when (if) they are finally built. Traditional nuclear reactor projects have a 95% failure rate from proposal to generation so 19 times of 20 they never deliver a single watt hour. Those times the money is just spent and lost. The one time in 20 that the generation comes online to produce the world's most costly power doesn't even include those costs.

At Hanford cold war nuclear waste continues to seep gradually toward the mighty Columbia river. Inch by inch.

Somewhere in America just now a homeowner just plugged his DIY solar panels into the inverter and battery he bought on Amazon for the first time. It will give power 24/7 for 30 years at no additional cost. It was quick and cheap. He didn't even need permission. It won't kill his family, nor yours, nor mine. There is no chance that his solar panels will result in radioactive salmon or other seafood.

Grace Slick said the music of "White Rabbit" was inspired by Miles Davis' "Sketches of Spain." Ergo, not art. Copyright denied.

art is made by artists, not robots

Can a cyborg be an artist? Can photography be art, or does using a camera disqualify it?

I don't consider myself an artist, but I suppose I could be. Like a lot of other computer dorks my age, back in the day I played around with ray-tracing and the classical mirrored sphere floating above a checkboard plane. (You too, huh?)

Then I tilted camera a little bit, changed the checkboard into a colorful 'Brot. Then multiple mirrored spheres, and a sun-like light source floating above it all (actually many light sources, slightly offset, to give the shadow edges more of a diffusion), a gradually shaded the sky to look like a winter sunset (I remember many January evenings walking home and looking at Albuquerque's evening western horizon, and thinking about parametric functions based on the angle, to recreate that blue-to-green-to-red look), then added more complex solids as I got a little better at the math, sent 4 or 9 rays through each pixel and anti-aliased, and ..

.. then focus moved away from the composition to performance, where I had a whole Netware network of machines at my workplace (shh, sneaking in there at night) to draw in parallel, using record-locks to control which y values were done/undone. And some of the machines were 486s with floating point hardware(!!) (OMG so fast!), and then ..

.. ok, and by the time I got bored and moved onto the next thing, I'll admit that what I had was still a cliche pastiche that few people would call art. It was crap, but it was damn fun to make, and that was the whole point. And so ends my story (but not my rant!).

But what if I had stuck with it? What if I had something to say? (Which I didn't.) I didn't draw those pictures, but I "drew" the thing that drew them. I specified them, and there was no limit to the complexity that could have been taken on. If had kept with it and had made something good (which I didn't), but then someone said I hadn't been the creator of my images, or that they were unfit for copyright whereas someone's freehand-drawn picture was fit, I think I would have resented that!

Wouldn't you?

The guy in the story didn't write Midjourney, but if he had, I would totally support his claim.

And waitaminute, so what if I wrote the program? That part of my work was just in getting it to work, and then getting it to work faster, and that's when I got bored because Dammit Jim, I'm a programmer, not an artist. But the other part of the work was the composition, the arrays of "objects" (this was straight C and nothing about the program was OO) and their positions and properties. What if someone else took my program but then modified the arrays to model the scene to their specification? Would their work be unfit for copyright?

Then they'll find out the hard way that Steve was right.

This is the single dumbest thing I've read on slashdot in 20 years.

It's reasonable when you consider they have to "support" those drives via their various support channels.

You put in a drive with incompatible firmware, then start asking for support because an issue with the firmware comes up, it directly costs them money.

Im not arguing the cost is valid, but if you've ever dealt with large commercial product support you would completely understand why its logical.

No you cant just refuse support to those people because
A. You will still contact them and waste resources to confirm an unsupported drive
B. Most states require vendors to honor warranty/support for modified products unless the vendor can PROVE the modification is the source of the problem.
C. Even after proof, some customers would continue to argue and add legal costs
D. Finally the customer will trash talk the vendor online and word of mouth, right or wrong ... costing the vendor even more money

Or they could just block your cheap drive and not have you as a customer and lose less money cause you're a tight wad.

You're not the customer they are interested in, you're a potential cost rather than profit.

Hope you're up on your Sumarian antivirals because I'm gonna Snow Crash your ass.

You're still alive, I see. Yes, it's true, the lethal payload mentioned in the above video isn't actually included within it. I knew there was little danger in linking to this video, but don't you realize it could have been much worse?

Doesn't removing the artist's signature usually reduce the value of a work?

That this isn't the case for Sora 2, tells me something about Sora 2's reputation.