1) Just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you should. Not everybody wants to install the Walmart app on their phone. 2) If you think only people who drive to Walmart shop there, and there are no Walmart's anywhere near public transport I have no idea what planet you are on, but it isn't planet Earth.

I'm sure that will comfort the grieving family. Q: "What happened? Why didn't you answer when I called 911? Why are they dead?" A: "Don't worry ma'am ... it's just a design and implementation issue. I'm sure they have the system still working in Heaven. I hear they don't have any idiots who think that blaming everything on the engineers makes sense up there"

Microsoft never follows anyone's conventions, usually reversing the standard when possible. They use "\" rather than "/" as filesystem separators, for example. In this case there is StandardCamelCase, and then there is microsoftCamelCase. Microsoft does not capitalize the first word or syllable, but they redefine the term CamelCase to "PascalCase" despite the fact that it originated in earlier languages like Smalltalk and Mesa, and just call microsoftCamelCase CamelCase, despite the fact that it can be confused easily with Hungarian Notation (staring the variable name with a type specifier.) They do all of this to try to keep market share, so that it becomes more uncomfortable to move to systems that actually follow standards. If all if this is confusing, that was Gates' intent when he began this kind of shitfuckery 4+ decades ago. His legacy of standing in the way of progress in computer technology continues into the present day. It is *never* about what is good for the customer or developers, and *always* about what generates more money and greater lock-in.

Users decide what applications they install and use, or they get a system administrator to do so. Since you said "your computer" it is fair to say that "you" are both the user and administrator. You can't explain it further because you don't even understand what you are saying. If you are running an OS that forces you to use AI then you are using the wrong OS. Furthermore, you aren't force to set up your applications to use AI running locally on your computer. Finally, you can enable and disable service, even on Windows. If you are going to try to snarky at least be right.

It would absolutely have been more accurate for me to say "even more extremely dangerous." Good point.

I'm not sure you know what a user is or what it is that a user uses.

"So by that logic your computer became a piece of crap over night because an application platform deemed it so."

What logic? I can't find any of it in your comment.

This question doesn't require multiple paragraphs to address (wrongly, I might add), because there is already a single sentence that you should have heard in a high school civics class you either never heard, forgot, or didn't understand: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," - Benjamin Franklin

First of all, this is directly related to the threats presented by AI and AGI. It's called mass surveillance that leads to a police state. You don't think that AI is a major component in modern mass surveillance technologies? Secondly, even if I concede that global warming is the bigger threat, so what? Are you incapable of understanding more than one problem at a time? Lastly, you are so put out by the cost of having stories on this topic in the feed that you took the time to post in the comments section.

How do you propose to make an issue of US Constitutional violations a local issue? Do you propose to make the Constitution opt-in with each state, county, town and villa deciding for themselves? I understand your point, and it sounds great ... until you think about it. The Constitution protects us from exactly that problem. If it didn't then outsiders traveling to and through certain sections of this country would be very dangerous indeed.

How did we get from the question of if the story was appropriate for Slashdot (which it definitely is) to how the comment section turned into a bunch of racist rants? A series of events happened. A man is dead. If people can't focus on the facts, choosing instead to assume his color is somehow the reason, that is on the racists, not the editors.

I understood the video just fine. You don't understand the difference between performance and capability. You are also confusing training time with quality of training. AI models (models,not LLMs) continue to improve in *capability*, and nobody has suggested they have stopped improving or found any reason to believe that this exponential upward trend in capability has suddenly plateud.

So the "hype" was real (news flash ... if it was real it wasn't hype) but now ... Just a few months ago ... this year ... much more capable models didn't get released? That's an absurd claim. It sounds like you simply didn't know what the word capable means, and think it is about improvement in a single domain. Capability is about models used across domains. If a model doesn't improve at all in a single application domain (say code generation) the capability still improves dramatically if it improves in multiple other domains. You are also still making the same mistake they are making by equating the LLM with the model. They are talking about scaling, which has to do with model training time ... not capability ... then concluding that because scaling doesn't reduce training time exponentially that scaling doesn't improve model capability exponentially. Again, nobody ever claimed that it does.

First of all you don't know what they are doing. Secondly, you failed to grasp the major failure in your reasoning again. If the way they do it is inaccurate that in no way accounts for any aberration in the data.

So your theory is that the OS fingerprinting became significantly more unreliable for a short period of time, and then returned to the previous degree of unreliability? I'm going to go out on a limb and say you didn't think that line of reasoning through.

In order to de-shittify Windows you would have to first de-shittify Microsoft, and that is never going to happen by cause Microsoft didn't get shittified, it has always been a shit company.