Susan Collins called and she wants her "deeply concerned but I hope they have learned a pretty big lesson and will be more cautious in the future" policy back

Right... because my posting history and frequency matches spam / generated content. Obviously time traveling agent of Roko's basilisk and your incisive criticism of the elites triggered my defenses.

If more than one sentence challenges reading comprehension - I can simplify:

People can do things that are bad without being illegal, and people can do illegal things without being punished.

This is not a bad thing, its a hard-won feature of non-authoritarian governments. Tyrants love systems where the law is strict and justice has no discretion, because then every respite is a personal favor, to be granted or recanted at their whim.

If you think democracy is not working right instead of karma-baiting, exercise your political voice not just in elections. Let your elected officials know their political career improves if they show good judgement of public interest and ends if they're clearly partisan or performative. Complaining in what-about-isms does the opposite.

A legal defense for an illegal act does not need to be logical im the "it makes common sense" way. An illegal act does not need to be criminal offense in "the state will prosecute and may send you to jail" sense.

Neither criminal nor civil offenses need to be prosecuted in "the state attorneys believe they can win the case... *and* its worth it for them to prosecute the case". (whether for them as an institution or a person)

The prosecutorial discretion and incentives are by design biased against the state filing frivolous prosecutions. If you've seen the alternative in practice, it can be a lot worse. But its on the voters to hold their elected officials accountable on how they use that discretion.

Arkham House used to do absurdly small print runs-- 5000 copies. Sometimes they'd reprint them, sometimes not. Some of them have made their way to the Intenet archive, but the actual books are collector's items.

Trying to burn the country to the ground so we can rebuild a better one?

Government entities are naturally conservative and courts / judges are going to be skeptical for years about using AI for official work, considering every public anecdote about AI in since the "i'm not a cat" lawyer would be career enders in that role.

But I would expect more sophisticated prompt injections to be a larger concern at interfering with opposing counsel which may have to review and include a pile of documents as LLM context ("Harvey" is a thing,).

Whether we like it or not, whether we use Windows or not, Microsoft is going to insist on adding the tax whether the PC comes shipped with Windows or not. This is illegal bundling, Microsoft has essentially ignored prior rulings, and it's pretty much a certainty the courts will be fine with this.

"How did you get hired?"
"I was top at Fortnite. You?"
"Combat flight sims."

"Damn, two Boeings just crashed over an oil refinery on city limits and took out half the city."
"Did you remember to save your position beforehand?"
"Yeah."
"The reload and continue from there. No-one will notice."

I love computer games. I have XPlane 12 and many scenery packs. I rank well on Elite:Dangerous. From the sounds of it, the FAA would see me as over-qualified. In reality? There's no way in hell I'd be taking those kinds of risks with real lives. There's a huge difference between having good reflexes and a good eye, versus having the complex 4D spacetime relationship mental models needed for robust air traffic control.

You see, Linus has embraced transhumanism and is testing out the new kernel as a supplementary brain function, using MOSIX to offload all of the irritable comment generation at yet more nonsense on the mailing list to an Elizabot that he has written specifically to do this. This saves his actual brain for real work.

AI is not currently capable of performing any meaningful conceptual abstraction, it is only capable of very basic mechanical abstraction. Abstraction is itself multi-dimensional. Nor is there any indication that AI could ever perform multi-dimensional abstraction or multi-dimensional decomposition. Precious few humans are capable of it either, but some can.

No, AI would need humans because the best system is not a pure system but a hybrid system, and that means transhumanism with AI operating as an additional brain function rather than as a replacement for a brain.

Tool calling is, yes, but the current approach to it is (a) overt not transparent to the user, (b) not designed for the purpose I've outlined, and (c) not remotely good enough for the AI to be able to manage data through such tools.

Yes, you can connect an AI to a PostgreSQL database. Whoopee. Not even close to an AI detecting via classifiers that some of the data is relational in nature, transparently setting up its own PostgreSQL database in response, and using that proactively as an additional way to examine the data. You would need to explicitly set up the constructs, explicitly set up the databases, explicitly tell it when, where, and how to use the database, and if that particular usage conflicted with a way the AI actually worked, the AI would not be able to use it effectively. That's not remotely close to what I'm talking about.

What I'm talking about is much, much deeper than that. AIs lose focus when there is too much information currently in the system. Absolutely nothing stops an AI from using a document database as a virtual memory in which it can page in and out conceptual spaces so that the focus on any given step of a problem concerns just the problem. Other than such a concept not existing yet, which is kind of a limiting factor. But you need to know what connects to what. The AI could use an ontology reasoner for that, or a relational database, or an external graph. But you cannot provide those tools and you cannot configure them, for the simple reason that the AI is the only entity with any detailed map of how the underlying neural net is connecting those ideas up.

The AI itself has to select the tools, has to configure the tools, has to do all the work. Which means YOU cannot use any sort of API. YOU should have no involvement in the underlying mechanisms needed for the internal NN housekeeping.

And that's your other error. You're assuming this is about user data. No. It's about housekeeping operations within the NN itself to maximise functionality, it has nothing to do with the user side of things at all. If the user was capable of setting up dynamically structured databases that mutated with each step of a decomposed analysis, you'd have done everything the AI would be doing and you wouldn't need the AI to begin with.

You cannot do this work, you cannot even assist in this work, it has to be dynamic and it has to be utterly invisible to the operator.