It wouldn't do jack shit, because no one watches CNN. Travelers used to be stuck with their network, as CNN used to pay airports to display their network, but that ended in 2021 as mobile devices took away that information monopoly, and CNN lost that ad revenue. CNN has half the viewers of MS Now, and only a quarter the viewers of Fox. CNN is way past their glory days, and essentially has become an Also Ran. And cable news doesn't have nearly the reach that the traditional US Big 3 news networks does. All the major cable news players combined still make up less viewers than the lowest rated Big 3 player, CBS, with 4+ million viewers. Which, btw, pales in comparison to ABC, with 8+ million viewers, and NBC with 6+ million. The idea that the Ellisons would "take over" American media is laughable on its face, even if they got Warner Bros. They'd still be a distant third in broadcast reach behind Disney and Comcast, hysterical wailing to the contrary.

OK. When? Because I've been hearing worst case scenarios all my adult life, and most of them are now past their predicted dates. Beginning with Paul Erlich's infamous predictions of mass-starvation in the 60's and 70's, nearly every year the press is filled with credentialed experts that tell us the end is nigh and that the point of no return is almost here. If you want to know why most of the public is so Meh about these doomsday predictions, it's because we've been inundated with the Boy Crying Wolf all of our lives. Would you like a timeline of all the point of no return predictions over the years? It's readily available.

Uh, no, it isn't. Post COVID, some companies are trying to guilt trip customers into tipping all employees in every job... I'm looking at you, fancy-pantsy coffee shops like Starbucks, Dutch Brothers, 7-Brew, etc.... but the vast majority of employees do not ask for nor receive tips as part of their jobs in America. And in jobs where I'd like to tip them for extra service.... grocery pickup, for instance... they're generally not allowed to ask for or receive tips.

Tipping is fine for waitressing, because if the service is good they can make considerably more money. But the post-COVID attempt by some companies to normalize tipping in their industries never took off in the US. Americans resented the push and saw it for what it was.

How does putting it underground mean less heat? It gets hotter the lower you go, and on top of that the problem is heat generated by the servers themselves - where's it supposed to go in a room that's that well insulated?

If you'd had suggested building them atop mountains, you might have been on to something, but those places are typically hard to reach and thus construct upon, and you'd also still need to power them and, of course, connect them to the Internet.

I saw a video complaining they did just that. The problem was that the power plant was a bunch of mobile gas-powered generators and it played havoc with people living nearby, noise and air pollution.

If they'd declared it up front, it'd have been less of an issue, because they'd have been forced to build a little further from the city and probably given clean air mandates to adhere to. But Musk is cheap and figured out he could bypass that by pretending it was just a data center, and then bringing in mobile generators after the data center was built.

Maybe wind and solar mandates would work. And if anyone says "But the wind doesn't always blow" (spoiler, it almost never doesn't, but let's pretend to take that argument seriously especially as it does apply to solar) there's this guy that's in the big-ass battery industry who might be able to help.

His name? Elon Musk.

The more I think about, the more I suspect that's what she means. I mean, not everyone who works for MI-6 understands Russian, right? I assume the qualifications for working there are a little more varied given Russia is not the only country they have to deal with, and just because someone's fluent in Russian doesn't make them generically helpful.

What I suspect she's saying is she wants the company organizationally more fluent in these things, not all individuals who work there.

Have US tech companies considered following the laws in the countries in which they wish to operate?

I've used ChatGPT to write code and Gemini to debug it. If you pass the feedback back and forth, it takes a couple iterations but they'll eventually agree that it's all good and I find that's about 90-95% of the way to where I need it to be. Earlier today I took a 6kb script that had been used as something fast and dirty for years - written by someone long gone from the company - and completely revamped it into something much more powerful, robust, and polished in both its code and its output. Script grew to about 20kb, but it's 10x better and I only had to make minor tweaks. Between the two, they found all sorts of hidden bugs and problems with it.

Very few people will benefit, given it's limited to whoever bought an iPhone in a specific month before the policy change took effect. Everyone before that had 2 months of service, everyone after it can't sue.

> Section 230 protects people and organizations who run websites which allow the public to post content to them without approval from prosecution, so long as they comply with certain legal requirements like declaring your point of contact for having material which remains unlawful removed, which in turn requires that you pay a yearly fee. (This requirement is not part of section 230, it was instituted later.)

This is complete bullshit.

Section 230 covers websites, but it also covers everything else. It is absolutely not necessary to register your website or put contact details on it for S.230 purposes. Perhaps you're confusing it with the DMCA, an entirely different law?

Section 230 covers everything. Web. Email. IRC. Usenet. Individual IP packets. etc. Nobody is responsible for the actions of a third party, period (except copyright infringement which is covered by the DMCA) no matter what the medium.

Which is as it should be.

I would assume he is given he described exactly what happened when he tried to not set up a Wi-Fi connection.

You're quoting someone as saying we're as far away as we ever were and claiming it's nonsense because nobody knows how far away we are?

You're not addressing the issue implied and nothing you're saying remotely contradicts it.

How can an atheist hate God? Do you know what those words mean?

Science fiction has generally answered that multiple times, a giant AI of the type proposed (and unlikely to happen - spicy autocomplete is not enough for AGI, it's not even 1% of what's needed) is not going to be located in a single place.

The obsession with cloud computing over the last 15 years has basically created an infrastructure for a supposed electronic intelligence to exist that cannot be easily depowered or disconnected.

(Note that I don't think an AGI is around the corner, just that it's not going to be running on a System/370 in your basement, liable to be disconnected when you trip over the power cord. This is an issue people have thought about and come up with solutions for over and over again, and it's the same solution each time, and yes, unfortunately, it's viable.)

Nobody said he didn't have "accomplishments". They said he's a sociopath and has no good sense of anything.

Basically Musk made it rich out of luck after Peter Thiel and friends bought his payment company. He managed the merged company, PayPal, for a short while before Thiel kicked him out for being incompetent.

He decided he really liked what Tesla was doing (not hard to do!) and recognized that US oil consumption was, at the time, considered a national security issue and felt one way or another a car company like Tesla would get help - so he bought it, took it over (this time with nobody in control enough to say no), and, well, kept fucking up. BUT because the product was compelling (not something he did, merely something he recognized) and because he is a decent salesman, the company managed to avoid bankruptcy, and the cult around him forced the share price through the roof.

I mean, this is a company where one of the stories told about "how good" Musk is involved Musk realizing, days away from bankruptcy, that Tesla hadn't actually fulfilled most of its pre-orders, and maybe it would be a good idea to get the cars rotting on the lots out to the people who put down deposits. So he pressganged everyone at Tesla, even the computer programmers, into calling everyone who put down a deposit to ask them if they wanted to buy the cars.

This is told, by Musk fans, as a story about how great a manager and CEO Musk is, rather than a sign Tesla is abysmally run.

Then there's SpaceX. Which *is* well run! Yes! But it's also famous for having an entire team of people whose job it is to manage Musk when he visits because they know he's awful.

Then there's the Boring Company. Uhm. OK. What happened to that again?

Then there's X. He takes over the second most popular social media network on Earth, whose infrastructure worked, alienates and/or fires most of those working for it, makes grand pronouncements about the technology that are clearly ill informed, and the thing he turned it into is... terrible. I mean, I can't even see a thread any more without logging in. And if someone links to a post all I see is the post itself (no replies) and a lot of spinning gifs. Meanwhile everyone that was worth following has fled to Threads, Bluesky, or the fediverse. The only reason it hasn't crashed out completely is inertia. And's clearly losing more money than it was when it was independent.

He's not a great business man, he's someone who knew what to invest in, but everything he's micromanaged has either failed, or succeeded despite him.

Yes he has accomplishments, but he's nonetheless awful. He's a walking demonstration that America needs to get over its obsession and worship of rich people. They aren't that smart. In fact, most of the richest among us seem to be the biggest idiots.