They won't want to touch the other side of it either. If what Flock is doing is fine, so is the creeper snapping photos on a public playground and creating a giant database somewhere.

That seems...undesirable.

The present administration is an extreme case, but ALL administrations like tools that make what they want to do easier. So does just about everyone, but larger groups tend to take more extreme positions, because some of their members are more extreme, and they are supported by the other group members.

The way this is being described is asinine. You lose a master and you're fucked, lose a copy and you still have the master. It's like words don't mean anything to these people. Additionally, fuck the studio for not encrypting it or exercising any sort of security on it at all.

Pretty much everyone in this story is a moron

Agency is just it's ability to act upon it's conclusions. While there is a great argument that AI should not be given agency, it had it.

If you're trying to say it had no sentience, I'll agree with that.

In the same sense that a gerbil has agency but not sentience. It too might escape from a cage.

Why isn't there a second independent AI that examines the main AI's output, and decides if it should be censored or not. If it thinks so, the answer is not delivered.

Since the second one is only looking at the first AI's output it seems like it would be difficult or impossible to fool it, especially if it's window is very short (like only the current message).

I assume there is some reason this does not work. Any explanations?

You really need the 0-th law for that to be a relatively safe position. Even that is going to hinge on your definition of "human".

Calling him a Nazi may be technically incorrect, but Elon seems to be favorably impressed by Hitler's actions. Enough so time cause emulations like MechaHitler.

It told me that I was a minor. I wasn't a minor when Slashdot first hit the web.

The problem is "How do you tell?". Certainly many things that claim to be evidence really aren't.
You can check that the code does what it claims to do. You can't really check that the claimed author really wrote it.

"The limitation lies in the inclusion of copyright-significant material generated by such tools in the code submitted to GCC"

This seems like the important bit. Isn't there significant concern over whether LLM generated code can be copyrighted?

You're focusing on the US. What are other countries seeing? My guess is that they're seeing China as a more reliable vendor.

I donâ(TM)t think intelligent is the right word. There was such an intersection a street over from my house in Toronto and I would have to get off my bike, go and push the pedestrian crossing button and then get back on. Fucking annoying and whomever thought it was a good idea was clearly brain dead.

Why do you accept that the reasons he give mean anything?
He wants to get rid of the power inverters. His excuses are just whatever sounds good at the moment. (That he wants to do it to cripple solar power sounds plausible, but I don't really believe it. That someone asked him to do it sounds more likely.)

Those are visible harassment campaigns (and visible on purpose to scare others). He was wondering about ones people don't know about, secret and/or unreported harassment campaigns.

Any good school for teaching art rather than art criticism would be hard. And would probably only teach one school of art. I doubt that hyperrealists would get along with romanticists.