To an extent, but recently had an exchange with one of these AI chatbots, and the difference is that the chatbot will confidently declare things that are actively incorrect. They will tell you to do things that simply don't exist. E.g. to transfer the case, go online and perform a very verbose set up steps starting with a button that doesn't exist). Note that we had asked to transfer because it misrouted us, and a human would have done it, but the chatbot had some weird imagined procedure for this.

But yes, human support has been pretty bad too, often deliberately prevented from being able to correct an issue. But at least they don't go off on weird tangents made up entirely from nothing.

I'm fairly sure at least one entire department at MS is tasked with making sure people don't switch to other formats, that despite on-paper "open" XML it remains incompatible and no competitor software can flawlessly read and write it.

So no, unless you can hire a dozen people full-time to counter that, you don't have a chance to break through that.

Qualified immunity is a reasonable concept that I agree is needed for police work.

It's just being completely overdone, used to cover up clear abuse. The basic idea of "when in doubt, police still needs to be able to act" is sound. The actual practice "unless you can prove to criminal standards and beyond, that the police officer knew at that exact moment, that what they were doing was totally definitely illegal and they intentionally decided to break a law. That's quite a bit too much of "err on the side of caution".

What a complete and utter surprise... to the three people who are so high their brain stopped working but miraculously didn't kill them.

For everyone else, this was literally the first thing we thought about, right? Please tell me I'm not the last sane person on planet Earth. Nobody expected that this would NOT be abused in such ways, right?

You're confusing the breaker sizing with the wire sizing. Code requires the breaker to be about 80% of the safe capacity of the wiring to maintain this safety margin. Breakers allow the rated capacity, continuously -- and even allow a little more for short periods.

Standard US outlets are 15A @ 120V. But, yeah, based on his numbers it looks like he was only getting a little over 8A. I charged my car on a US outlet for a few years and I got more like 5-6 miles (8-9.5 km) her hour of charging, which is pretty much what the math predicts for 15A @ 120V.

First a nit about units: You mean "you get about 1 kW".

"kW/hr" doesn't make sense as a unit because watts are an instantaneous measure; time is already divided out. "1 kWh/hour" technically makes sense but is kind of pointless because it's just "1kW * 1 hour / 1 hour". Also, a standard US outlet is 15A @ 120V = 1.8 kW, not 1 kW. There's a little loss so you get more like 1.7 kW into the battery.

I've also been driving EVs since 2011 (two Nissan Leafs, three Teslas), and I get more like 5-6 miles per hour, which is consistent with the math: 3 miles/kWh = 333 Wh/mile. 1.7 kW / 333 Wh/mile = 5.1 mi / hr. 4 miles/kWh = 250 Wh/mile. 1.7 kW / 250 Wh/mile = 6.8 mi/hr.

Maybe your mileage is worse than you think? Were you not getting 15A from your outlet? Your numbers fit if for some reason you were only getting about 8A out of your wall outlet, when you should have gotten nearly twice that much.

More like 50A @ 240V = 12 kW. My car will only take 48A, but my voltage is usually closer about 245 which the math says is 11.76 kW, and I normally get about 11.2 kW into the car.

Note that at 9 kW, 27 mi/hr = 333 Wh/mi, and 36 mi/hr = 250 Wh/mi, so your numbers line up there.

So I guess a supply chain attack now needs to flag the version bump as 'security' then.

That's really not what's going on here.

What's going on is exactly what they're saying. OpenAI didn't realize their AI hacked HuggingFace until HuggingFace told them. That sparked a broad investigation in both Anthropic and OpanAI, scouring their logs to see if there were other cases, and they're finding a lot of them, and doing the responsible thing by disclosing.

Both companies are really worried.

Having an out-of-control AI is an anti-selling point, not a selling point.

I am an American, have been for all of my 57 years. I'm actually a certified pistol, rifle and shotgun instructor, a certified range safety officer, and a concealed carry instructor. And while I wouldn't recommend it, it's not at all hard to get away with shooting outside of one of those situations.

Also, it was a joke.

It is not obvious to me why a water system needs to be on the net. I understand having remote controls of various valves and pumps and so forth, but can't all of that be on a private local network?

I'm disappointed that no one is shooting them. That would be the American way!

No one can hear the failure of their consumer platform business over the massive flow of money for their cloud and office businesses.

If they shrugged and canned the entire Xbox and Windows things entirely, that's less than 9% of their revenue, and likely an even tinier portion of their profit. They would probably also lose all their consumer Microsoft 365 except people who never check and cancel subscription services, but that's probably similarly tiny in the scheme of the business.

You basically have a story of robust cloud revenue and also as I understand some 'rotation' in the market as investors decide that the AI darlings are probably going to be already as high as they can get for a while, and it's time to cash in and switch to other companies that either seem plausible for share price growth or at *least* actually profitable today with dividends and/or stock buybacks. So the viable quarter came at just the right time to catch investors looking to cash out of their big AI investments for the short term.