This is the actual problem with nuclear power. And by the time it comes around, the people who made the decisions have already safely moved elsewhere or into pension.

Correct. Breaking is entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

If something breaks, it's on me. This is about companies being able to take something away that isn't broken at all, at any time they choose, without any refund.

For any other item that'd be theft and would land them in jail.

If you think software never breaks, I have a bunch of 5.25" disks somewhere that want to have an argument with you.

It's a complete strawman to argue that physical things break. If I buy music, digitally, that won't break and yet nobody sane would expect that the band can at some random time in the future say "we revoke all our music". I can also think of a number of physical things that unless I mistreat them will easily survive me and three generations down the line.

This is not about replacements, it's about taking the product sold away but keeping the money.

And what stops you from making a seperate license to play on the servers provided by the company that is based on good behaviour and/or monthly subscription fees?

This is what the Stop Killing Games movement is also about: Sure, we understand that eventually you wind down the online servers, no problem. But if I paid for a game, why should you have the right to disable it? With no other things I buy can you at any time later come to my house and take them back or disable them. Not with my microwave, not with my shower, not with my lights.

On the other hand, this is a great way to fish out the few bad ones. If you can't control a temptation to use power for personal gain, you shouldn't be a police officer.

This provides both opportunity, and also hard evidence admissible in court if someone takes it.

I.e. cop with tendencies to stalk would use other means to stalk that are less traceable. This reveals them.

PRC leadership disagrees with you in the strongest possible way.

By putting entire state apparatus' resources behind efforts to procure those chips.

In my experience, it's very language dependent. Big popular languages like English? Big players in the field like google got their AI good enough to take diction even when speaking quickly after minimal training.

But smaller languages like Finnish? The level of "oh no, it's retarded" is over 9000.

Also needs a decent quality mic and reasonably clean background noise levels in most cases.

Makes me wonder if AI dev teams finished fixing "AI agents that can configure OS settings for you directly with admin privileges" to the point where they're safe enough to use (i.e. won't change something destructive by accident).

I remember seeing news about Claude based agents still doing weird shit with unintended destructive operations just a few months ago.

I suspect everyone from people with disabilities, to people who struggle with fast typing on keyboards (a shocking amount of gen Z and gen Alpha, who are used to on screen keyboards are in this category).

For us older dudes who grew up doing work with keyboards, we probably type faster than we can speak clearly. And with less errors.

But we're not the whole population. Not by a long shot. And for those who are less keyboard-inclined, this may be a useful feature.

That's a cool history reference I forgot.

But indeed, a better question is the eternal one: "how do you make gambling fair?"

It's an eternal question because it's a moving target. As honesty-seeking players adapt, so do their dishonest counterparts.

Considering that overwhelming majority of tech workers is already using AI, this is going to go places.

Not good places mind you.

The reason why a lot of European cities still have mass transit that functions is because these are still mostly homogenous, high trust societies when it was deployed. That means things like accosting passengers, random violence, theft and other antisocial behaviors that normal passengers can't escape (because you're in a metal/plastic/glass box trapped with the murderer/thief/etc).

In US, a lot of public transit is useless because of cases like Irina Zarutska. You can have the busses, the metro, etc, and it's used only if utterly necessary because the risk of "another crazy freak will just stab you in the neck" is relevant.

Essentially, successful build out of mass transit is a marker of high trust society that has purged lowest 1-2% of its people from commons.

This sort of "show how you're winning" advertising has been a thing with gambling since before mass media.

You'd have card sharks doing things like fake players who win a lot to entice actual targets to play and lose.

Buy indie games.

It's only the big players who have these delusions.

I'm not saying the right answer is to get a refund. The right answer is to not make the license revokable.

For the theater comparison: If the theatre would invalidate my ticket and throw me out mid-movie, you can be sure that I'd ask for a refund. And in any sane jurisdiction, I'd get it.