Any justice official caught fabricating evidence ought to receive the typical sentence for the crime they were fabricating evidence for, plus time for the offense of violating the public trust/their duty.

Linux and ARM would disagree. Probably loads more too.

True, but their production is linked. Maybe, as drinkypoo suggests, that's the idea: artificial "demand"/synergies.

OTOH, wikipedia suggests that warhead plutonium pits are far richer than is typically used for power generation, making it a rather wasteful end use. Seems like it would be best to repurify the existing high-purity material to create replacement pits.

They want to give it to private industry, yet NASA has issues getting enough for its missions, and somehow the war hawks also want to make more nuclear weapons. These do not seem to be mutually coherent goals... (subsidizing the power industry, providing NASA with adequate resources, and potentially restarting the nuclear arms race)

But the phone book did not list one's political affiliation.

It is not an "official religion." It is *recognized* as a religion by the IRS, and receives the same egregiously advantageous financial benefits as other religions, but that doesn't really give it any more weight than Mormonism, Presbyterianism, Catholicism, etc. None of which (thus far) are "official" in this increasingly "best of all possible worlds" >-|

Isn't claiming that a magical computer program can find all bugs in another program effectively a variation on the halting problem?

I can understand all that, but it still doesn't say why acting deserves special treatment.

Coders enjoy coding. AI has taken a chunk out of that, and people treat it as beneficial. It's taken a lot of translators out of the picture. They enjoy what they do. It's taken a slice out of countless jobs that people enjoy doing, and there's been a bit of a murmur about job losses.

Then we get to acting, with a famous actor being deep faked into a movie with the consent of his estate, and everyone is up in arms because actor and celebrity.

The sad bit is yes, this obsoletes many aspects of human engagement, just as the industrial revolution rendered a lot of manual work. It will continue to do it. The question is how we as a species adapt to it, and utilise it to our benefit.

It's not just a child. It's a child plus a network of organised crime that specialises in tooling for illicit compromise, which said child has access to, plus contacts with compromise experience to learn from. This changes things significantly.

Cybersecurity is a hellishly expensive thing if done to the degree that's found in financials and the like (where a bad compromise could have serious international ramifications).
Most places don't have the budget to hire enough of the right staff to protect against a dedicated attacker with up to date compromise tools. It only takes one flaw for things to start going very wrong indeed.

It's a case of "Taking security as seriously as you can afford to" as an operational expense, and keep insurance up to date for if you're ever compromised.

Surely if the CEO can't be bothered to show up for meetings then he ought not be paid so much?

This was addressed in TNG: deliberate panspermia.

People who quote that quip aren't being half as clever as they think, since it rather depends on the distribution. A normally distributed "intelligence" with a very small standard deviation would not be much of an issue

That's a horrible idea because someone could simply build a bigger cluster, or record and save communications until they can get some better hardware in a few months.

How about Forbes? Is that sufficiently billionaire boot-licking for you?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2025/11/12/trump-organization-record-foreign-workers-visas-2025/

To clarify that'd be strict and enforced privacy regulations with teeth, not a central clearinghouse.