Also note that these 58'000 students are only asked to prove their competence a 2nd time in person, they are not expelled or denied.
Not even denied for inability to afford last-minute travel to a city where the exam is held?
In schools no matter how robust the hardware, the kids will destroy them. You'll have to buy a whole new set next year for the new kids anyway.
Apple started as a hardware company, with network services coming MUCH later.
Google were always a network first company.
"We're not going to change humans, and humans make bad decisions," Langley said. "What we can do is make sure that they know if you use this tool, you will be held accountable...."
Wow he's right,
So maybe what we could do instead is to outlaw mass surveillance and warrantless surveillance, whether government-owned or corporate, across the country.
We could even have a constitutional amendment! Let's call it #4. The OLD 4th amendment doesn't seem to be doing anything; we can call this one '4th-Prime'.
To be clear, the language would have to change if you wanted it to outlaw corporate surveillance, because the existing one applies only to government. And I suppose the new one would also have to explain "corporate" and how that's different from other kinds of organizations or surveillance by individuals.
Most popular subreddits are overrun with bots. r/politics and r/conservative are notorious hives of bots regurgitating talking points at each other. Discussions of Israel and China are always hit by bots spreading the same propaganda. And every little sub is getting hit by bots recycling old posts. If reddit is supposed to be a place for humans then the company sucks at it.
AI call taking seems to be getting to be more common and, I guess, very inexpensive.
My plumber (one man and a truck full of tools out working on his own) has an AI answering his phone now. I called him a while back and a woman answered the phone. Ok, I thought, must be his wife answering the phone. She asked what I needed and said that she will pass the information on, then asked a further question that was related to what I had said but that was worded too... "formally", I suppose, for the subject under discussion (an outstanding order for air conditioner part that I was had called for an update on) and I suddenly realized that it's not a person I'm talking to.
And this is a one-man plumbing operation, not a big corporate entity.
Again, this is one guy
I don't think CIP is going to be successful at keeping 10 year-old kernel versions secure. If you need 10 years, you should either plan to do the work necessary to upgrade to new kernel versions periodically
The world is full of critical systems that are certified via an extensive (reads: expensive) process for a specific OS version which have an estimated useful life far longer than 10 years. One does not simply upgrade it, and typically the end user may not even be allowed to upgrade it.
Everyone has to make their own decisions. I would discourage people from believing that SLTS kernels will be anything like secure by the end of their lifecycle. If that doesn't matter for some application, then fine. If it does matter then arguing that the SLTS kernel must be secure because recertifying is expensive is... not really an argument.
FWIW, in my day job I'm making this same point to people building cars with an expected 20-year lifespan. I think the right conclusion is "Don't use Linux". If you need long-term assurance, use something smaller, simpler, with much less attack surface. And then buy an ironclad long-term support contract for that.
BC search and rescue has lots of very good reasons why they don't charge. It's a public service like police, fire and health care.
Backporting patches into LTS is pretty thankless but absolutely necessary.
It's thankless, yes. Necessary, or even a good idea? I think that's debatable. Actually LTS is probably a good idea... but I'm very skeptical of SLTS. I don't think CIP is going to be successful at keeping 10 year-old kernel versions secure. If you need 10 years, you should either plan to do the work necessary to upgrade to new kernel versions periodically or you should assume that it's just going to be insecure and isolate it or otherwise shield it from attack.
One small book seller said that in April, he suddenly went from selling no more than 20 books a week to hundreds, and he's almost certain that the customers are AI labs
So, hasn't the slightest idea. Even if the description is true, what they're describing is random. There's no reason to specifically go after rare books. The valuable rare books are going to be old, so not terribly useful for training modern language models, and the newer rare books are going to be rare because they're crap that's not worth printing.
That story never made sense. Stop falling for it. Rare books are expensive. AI companies want bulk text, not expensive text.
Even those people don't dream of a job where they get to talk to pissed off people and get yelled at all day.
The application for this seems to be things like sports broadcasting. The drone, with a built in camera, is your equipment.
It would be pretty strange if an "institution" sent you a "letter" expecting you to edit it.
Just have them make the requests through a second person. Sure they can still abuse it but the second person might ask questions if the same weird requests persists
If you can't understand it, it is intuitively obvious.
