Plenty of trucks and other vehicles have little or any effective view directly out the back. To be blunt: If you need to look through your rear-view mirror to not kill someone, you either need better side mirrors or you need to learn to drive.

It hasn't been "autocomplete" in a long time. Sure, there's a training step based on a corpus of Human language, and the autoregressive process outputs a single token at a time, but reinforcement learning trains specific behaviors beyond merely completing a sentence.

Besides, the best way to write something indistinguishable from what a Human might write is to, well, "think" like a Human.

Are we, as a sapient species facing an uncertain prospect of continuence in a world full of rapidly-advancing bullshit going to learn from this catastrophic and absurdly predictable failure of information security, personal and professional ethics, civilian government, market economics, basic common sense, and consumer psychology?

Eight-Ball-Based-On-Cursory-Reading-Of-Literally-Any-Slice-of-Human-History says "no".

What do you say, and why is it also "no"?

I don't necessarily disagree with where you're going here, but can you elaborate on this:

I've worked at government contractors that had real air-gaps for things like their databases, but that does not seem to be the norm for the rest of the world. How would ordinary businesses make use of their databases if they are not network accessible under any circumstances, printed reports? Some sort of unidirectional transmission? What sort of data ingress are they using?

I ask this because I have been involved in the transfer of data in highly regulated, air-gapped systems, and they are incredibly expensive. Are you really indicating that true air-gap databases will be ubiquitous (or at least commonplace) in the forseeable future?

It's a cool idea and they stand for a lot of great ideals, but laptops are incredibly hard to get right, drivers are hard to get right, and they are a small team trying to support a large number of possible configurations. Hardware gets more complicated by the year: forget the CPU and various GPUs, just look at how many other devices in a modern computer have a full-on processor, e.g. fancy touchbars, displays, even hard drives! Hell, your CPU probably has its own secondary general-purpose processors for things like security, and our CPUs themselves get firmware updates now to change how their instructions function. They are doing great work, but the deck is so stacked against them that it's not funny.

Most space launch companies are inefficient and ineffective. SpaceX has the margin to pay these taxes, those unfortunates don't. If you want to kill competition in an industry, tax it enough that only the large corporations can survive the loss, and add some complicated regulations in for extra effect. No one else has anything close to what Starship may become, and further reduction in margins will ensure that SpaceX will have a defacto monopoly on non-military space launches while their competitors are strangled paying for FAA services that is disproportionately benefit owners of private jets and charter flights for the rich.

The point is to prevent "tearing". A lot of effort has been put into solving that problem.

If the pixels were updated in some random or semi-random pattern on the screen it would probably be unnoticeable, but I suspect that either a lot of architectural changes would be needed both in software and hardware, or you would effectively have to achieve a 480Hz full-screen refresh rate to achieve it without doing things like attaching an address to each pixel output so the rendering device didn't need to assume sequential pixels should be drawn sequentially.

The idea that software not signed by some entity in the country that they represent is installed any high-level official's phone is absurd. How did the world get this way?

Wait, are you GPT-3? Maybe 2?

What do you mean by "compiles cleanly to predictable ASM"? Do you mean individual lines always output the same assembly in any given context? That hasn't been true for a long time, so you can't mean that. Do you mean that if you follow the steps of the C compiler in a given OS state that you will get roughly the same (the same for all intents and purposes, but things like compile-time constants like, well, COMPILE_TIME might differ) output? Well, yeah, that's called running a program, you're just doing it in your brain.

Are you saying that every C compiler is deterministic in a (consequential) way that Rust compilers are not?

It's got to be something I haven't thought of. What am I missing?

I don't know Rust, but why would those structures be particularly challenging for bounds checking?

And pen testing

Software is progressing nicely, but I think the next major step will be along the lines of neuromorphic computing and the use of memristors in neuromorphic devices.

I have just come out of working with Android Automotive for the last 6 years and being the first to deploy it in a real car (whilst also working on lots of other very large OSS platforms previously)
Upstream is the only way, our SOC vendor was having to manage 500+ patches against android and linux which was an awful lot to manage everytime upstream changed.
I see the price of being able to use OSS is to be a good citizen and upstream those patches you have which will also benefit your by reducing your maintenance burden, and as stated in the article keep down fragmentation.

That said, Android will be changing to Fuchsia soon right so Linux will be a dead end for Android soon.

You carefully read it twice, and still latched on to a point that you made up.

Congratulations. You have objective proof that you're both stupid and so gullible that you can be fooled by someone as dumb as you. This will be highly valuable information in your life from now on, should you choose to accept it.