Important question ... does NOT deserve zero (0) KARMA. The answer to the questions is ... of-course ... yes, it's worth losing 10-K non-situationally-aware folks per year in order to have private access to strip-clubs, churches, Marx-readings, Ann Rand reading, Galileo lectures, barn dances & raves. Encouraging subversive behavior in a (re)publican nation ought to be job-one of the government. Besides, with every citizen ensured by Dan Wesson the need for Gestapo-type policing falls greatly.

Jobs was a completely non-technical stuffed shirt. The only things he brought to the table were his narcissistic self confidence and a sleazy ability to sell other people's work.

And make no mistake, those are valuable skills, if your goal is to get rich rather than to build the best toys. Even under the most charitable possible interpretations, however, it's still a fundamentally parasitic relationship. The "doers" tend to suck at selling ourselves, while the weasels are good at rooting through our scraps and claiming whatever shiny garbage they find as their own.

It's negligence.

If you were an IT Director, or even an IT Technician with the ear of the Founder/CEO, and you had the budget for internal network and security ops, what would you do?

Not give it unbrokered access to other models and infrastructure which it could use to puddle jump elsewhere. Not put Skynet on the Internet directly, is my bet.

That hardly sounds like a controlled release environment, to say the least.

They seriously need to hire some criminal psychologists and actual hackers to help them figure their shit out. Same goes for Anthropic.

When has someone's computer ever hacked someone else's computer ?

Not ever, before recently.

Clearly it's not something they can objectively say is an outlier - they don't have enough data. In fact, you can most certainly say the opposite, due to how frequently it's happening now.

Not a serious or honest company. (Oh, sorry - "nonprofit".)

Everything I've seen simply suggests they're bad at computers.

My experience with startups is that the things that don't make money or make customers happy don't get any attention. Network/system security in depth is not one of those things. Sure, they've got a bunch of psi-brain neuroscientists and mathemagicians, and goodness knows lots of DEI-enforcers for alignment, but their repeated dumb mistakes in this department tells me they're not really hiring too many experienced ops, nevermind devops, types.

It's true for OpenAI and Anthropic both.

In the past YEAR they have:
- accidentally published the full Claude Code source (and then effectively... did nothing).
- Numerous Claude Code RCE/API-key vulnerabilities which could have been mitigated with at least one person on their core infra team aware of injection attacks.
- Publicly exposed their internal CMS (and files) to the Internet
- Had their training escape numerous times and hack other orgs
- hacked HF

They're not a serious company. Some are to be expected given their visibility and exposure, but you'd expect a bit more from a company implementing Skynet-level capabilities. However you slice it, they're fundamentally building weapons which can write poetry. A little more seriousness should be involved.

Someone needs to end this crazy tyrant's empire, though I suppose it's too late for that. He's so diversified at this point that ending Microsoft won't materially impact him.

That said, it'd be great if the thing he built could be ended - perhaps by reimplementing Windows functionality through reverse engineering, minus the crap.

Just enough to get it to work with the things we still need to run on Windows - then replace the kernel.

That's the type of meter the VA issues to me. And, I send my readings to my Diabetes Coach about once a month and we discuss how I'm doing and adjust things if needed. I've been doing this for about 20 years, and am very well controlled.

Did you mean Chinese law enforment ( offices in USA ). The CCP owns/controls Motorola just like their sock-puppet LENOVA owns IBM-PCs. Oh yeah BTW: enjoy that CCP  bacon ... even with the bat+dog after-taste.

Much better then finger sticks 20 times a day leaving the tips of your fingers covered in bruises, pin pricks or just numb.

Man, you must have some seriously major case of diabetes if you need 20 sticks per day! I take 22 units of Lantus every morning and Novolog on a sliding scale with each meal and only four sticks per day. One before each meal and one at bedtime.

Serious question - How does the Online Streaming Act work in practice for content on demand? When a Canadian tries to binge the latest season of Stranger Things, is NetFlix required to say "nope, go watch this Celine Dion concert first to get our CanCon ratio up"?

I get how it could apply to randomized content like streaming radio, but the very concept seems incompatible with "choice".

Notarization is Apple's strict code signing process, which makes it hard for non paying and anonymous developers to distribute third party Mac software. Linux lets you run unsigned software without compromise.

Thanks for the definition.

So far, I've not run into a problem with this....

And with specific regard to my local AI and OpenClaw experiments and tools required for that....haven't run into a problem at all yet.

So, not a barrier of merit.

Especially with AI and ARM64 server development. Having to go through brew, containers and Apple's notarization process makes MacOS not a serious platform compared to bare metal Linux. In a twist of fate it is MacOS that is not ready for the AI desktop. Asahi is stuck on M1 and M2 so can't help you with M6 Macs.

Err...actually, OSX, so far in my experience is quite adapted to local AI.

Brew? What's wrong with that...pretty much the equivalent of of apt-get on some Linux installs, or whatever package manager you use there...

Docker is easy to run on Mac...actually it seems to give a bit more isolation they way it works on Mac...but set up is a breeze and while containerization is not required to run AI or OpenClaw on a Mac, it IS a good idea for security reasons to do so....Mac or Linux!!

Not familiar with any 'notarization" on my Mac set up, please explain?

OH...and running stuff on ollama, you get to take advantage of of the MLX framework for running local AI models....really speeds things along....

So, not quite sure why you are trying to say Macs aren't good for AI work....they actually are quite good for it AND I guess a bit more plug and play to get things set up and running.

And with any platform the more secure you make it, well that adds complexity, but it's worth it....I'd not want to turn OpenClaw or the like free on any platform without guard rails....

The automative vs. augmentive distinction that AI companies and the ownership class want you to believe in is nonsense meant to keep the working class calm as their job opportunities dwindle away. The only difference between them is a quantity threshold. Augmentive means multiplying the number of jobs available by a number greater than zero but less than one (as fewer people can do the same work), automative means multiplying the number of jobs available by zero. Both mean jobs are lost, the only difference is how many remain.

Is 98 greater than 56? Yes? Okay then. It's still going up. So much vitriol from someone posting nothing but bare assertion - Cite please, beyond your fee-fees?

Let me 'splain it to you in simple language. The number of qubits doesn't need to scale exponentially on the short term for quantum computing to pose a very real threat; it only needs to hit the mid hundreds. As I mentioned, Grover's algorithm is O(n) - Meaning once we hit 256 qubits (plus some change for overhead), SHA256 is substantially weakened. Is that a full crack of AES, which you'll kindly notice I didn't previously claim, Mr. Goalposts? No. No it isn't - But it's arguably worse - SHA is almost ubiquitous and affects far more than encryption itself. You don't need to crack a tank's armor if you can convince its driver to piss in the fuel tank.

I also happen to think - and to be clear, what follows is my opinion, not psychic knowledge about the future - you're completely wrong on the bigger picture; and once QC hits its stride Gordon Moore will again be relevant. But critically, that's not necessary for it to cause some serious damage in the near future.