sounds like the plots of a cheap SF movie.

They shouldn't be trying such a desperate solution without trying chlorox and ivermectin first.

Just don't leave the country after you participate.

For that matter, you may suffer remote retaliation even if you stay home. I would leave this to the military or other government branch.

Also there is the question of legality, government operation or not. It sounds to me like vigilante justice. And countries who like their anti-American cybercriminals will certainly treat it as illegal. (Hence the advice not to leave the country.)

We certainly need a way to stop cybercrime, international or otherwise. But this doesn't strike me as a good way to go about it.

Finally a prediction: in the not too distant future, one or more offshoots from this will turn into unmanageable domestic criminal organizations.

Even Batman's job is threatened by AI.

It's just ET trying to phone home. Probably dialed the wrong number.

Ideology vetos reality, news at 11.

A lot of people behave pretty ghastly when it comes to money.

That was my first thought too. (Assuming the article is correct - all kinds of stuff gets published that doesn't hold up in the longer run.)

Remember that time is also big. Suppose that there have been 1000 interstellar civilizations in our galaxy during the past 5 billion years, and that each one lasted a million years before collapsing. How many would be active right now?

Frankly, I don't consider it a paradox at all. We've explored approximately 0% of our galaxy and found nothing. That doesn't tell us much.

Doesn't he know he's supposed to play the fiddle while he destroys his country?

I'm skeptical about that second part.

As for trolls, I wonder if some anti-vax propaganda is being pushed by hostile foreign powers as a way of hurting us.

It's just a story about Meta and AI.

Oh, nevermind.

For extremists of all flavors, violence is always preferable to the voting booth.

Surely they're not going to cut off the data centers just so ordinary people can have electricity?

If you're going to repost the entire lede of the story, at least also share the counterpoint: "Gary Marcus, a reliable critic of the field, called the release amazing but vastly oversold. Some specialists expect that once the dust settles, a few of the ten will look genuinely surprising and the rest will be classified as reachable problems that nobody had gotten around to attacking."

And ironically, or maybe unironically, this story reads like it was AI-generated. Phrases like these:

"Three objections are worth taking seriously, and the honest reading concedes all three."

"Grant every objection and the structural point survives intact. Whether the ten were cherry-picked or not, the certificates still verify. A curated result that mechanically checks is a different object from a curated result that does not."

"The cost of producing a hard answer just fell to almost nothing, and the constraint moved to proving the answer is right."

Most humans don't write quite like that.

Well, yes. But the politicians say the scientists are wrong.

Who are you going to believe? Geeky nerd types, or the people who actually run the real world?