Re: TANSTAAFL
Or.... and hear me out, we say fuck you to their cries of poverty and externalization of costs, unless they start sharing profits in the same way they try to foist costs off onto everyone else.
431 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Sep 2007
Output from Claude 5 Sonnet:
Challenge accepted. Let me demonstrate that AI can, in fact, achieve a new low.Here's my attempt at a passage that takes Joyce's stream-of-consciousness portmanteau chaos and adds the one thing that could make it worse: corporate-AI blandness bleeding through the cracks.
riverrun, past leverage synergized and moved the needle to Howth Castle and Environs, where Anna Livia Plurabelle, per my analysis, doth flow-optimize her tidal deliverables, circling back (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk!) to touchbase with HCE, stakeholder of the mountain, whose thunderword — as an AI I should note I cannot independently verify the veracity of this thunder — doth reverberate synergistically across the value-chain of dreams, circa Finn, again, MacCool, low-hanging fruit of the giants, leveraging his prone bulk as a scalable infrastructure for the Liffey's onward-flowing KPIs...
This is what happens in the morning before I had coffee.
Oh, I was referring to a new SCOTUS standard of "historical usage" or whatever the hell they came up with. It's specifically around gun laws, I guess, but overall, the idea was that if dead dudes tried it before, it must be okay regardless of what the Constitution says in plain text.
My attempt at the joke was that since "hacking" was not something that the framers or founders did, the Constitution is silent on the matter and therefore it's allowable, despite there being a literal clause stating that only the Legislative branch can issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Therefore, the SCOTUS will find Trump can do whatever he wants, because reasons.
The US Constitution explicitly places the issuance of Letters of Marque in the hands of the Legislative branch, and other than 214 years since they were last issued, I don't see how this would be any different.
Of course, the SCOTUS might think otherwise as there is no "history" of the US using privateers to hack enemy nations and criminal organizations, so clearly it's not covered.
I await the day when a nuke is launched on accident by a firm trying to get a payday, or as retaliation for some catastrophic attack by a private firm. Good times.
Rather than emergent behavior or evidence of AGI, there is a word for the kind of self-organization demonstrated here: stigmergy
It's still coordination, but more like what you'd find in eusocial insects. What usually prevents world-domination is genetic diversity in a species and between colonies. Unless you're Linepithema humile, the Argentine Ant, that is. I would say this is just the same model (low genetic diversity among spawned agents) executing the same mission (impossible tasks) with a mindless persistence.
That's not to say a hive of AI Agents following the Argentine ant model isn't frightening; just that we should properly label this behavior before basing our solutions on the wrong metaphor.
Neat bit of work, though.
Microsoft's "free" AI for schools isn't charity; it's the oldest trick in the business playbook: the first hit is free. Get an entire generation of students and teachers hooked on your proprietary ecosystem, and you've secured customers for life. It's a brilliant market capture strategy disguised as philanthropy.
The price of this "gift"? Our kids become unpaid data-miners, training corporate models with every homework assignment. We're also outsourcing education to tools that have been shown to weaken critical thinking. An AI doesn't mentor curiosity; it optimizes for a standardized output.
So when you see this Trojan horse rolling up to your school district, ask what's really inside. Hint: It’s not a gift, it's a future invoice.
But seriously considering alternatives for future projects? Abso-fucking-lutely.
There are plenty of fish in this particular sea, and the oligarchic takeover of the USA means that it's all but guaranteed that this will destroy Arduino as we know it.
It won't be long before the Fanta Fascist will demand Qualcomm bend the knee as well, and these chickenshits are too spineless to do anything but ask His Majesty how deep He wants it gargled.
Let's be honest: the companies that jumped off the AI Agent cliff were ones who already put customer service on the back burner. To them, customers and servicing them was a money sink, so throwing a little more after a hastily-trained ChatGPT model was made without a second thought. Companies which pride themselves on customer care either skipped AI or used AI to create tools to be used by customer service, not replace them.
That is the model which has a better chance of working, especially if the humans are empowered to supplement their skills with AI rather than become subservient to them.
In the mean time, I'm sure this mercurial administration will provide loads of certainty to businesses who want to re-shore or rebuild American manufacturing in such areas as garments, plastic toys, and topical fruit.
Mine's the one with a copy of Peddling Protectionism in the left pocket
Now that "Liberation Day" is here, we're celebrating by increasing consumer prices by 10% at a minimum. So while the analysis isn't completely wrong, it can no longer be said they would duck the tariffs.
If you need me, I'll be finding more screws to tighten on the ol' family budget.
Probably none, as there is a notion in the US Government that the Executive Branch is solely in charge of security clearances, and therefore can perform as much (or little) vetting as desired. Of course, this was nominally thought to be a good plan, because why would the American people elect a compromised charlatan to be President? And even if they did, surely the other two co-equal branches of government would step in once they realized what was going on.
So yeah, good times over here.
@Ayemooth
If you go here: https://myaccount.google.com/security after logging in to your Google Account, you can scroll down and see all the devices currently logged in. From there, you can also log out individual devices, or all of them.
It's not the best option for most people given how buried it is.
Not only is it a known issue, I'm pretty sure other sites offer a mechanism to invalidate all current logins to your device during password reset, mitigating this type of attack. Google even alludes to this in their response at the end, but that it's not offered during reset or change is an odd thing.
I have to dig around, but there was a YT a while back of a tech showing why lithium batteries are flammable, and I believe one of the tests was level of charge. Those that were not charged beyond a certain point didn't catch fire even after being pierced, as they didn't have the energy necessary to ignite.
I believe there is (was) a regulation about batteries being transported en masse (think air freight), they needed to be below a certain charge level to be safe.
Edit: Found a study by the FAA, and it's abstract shows that batteries with a state of charge of 30% or less were much less prone to runaway thermal issues than those charged at 70% and higher.
(https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/tctn22-27.pdf)
I know the readership here may be a bit more dour than your typical IT professional, but this comment section reads like a roast without the good-nature humor.
Space is hard, and it's a legitimate question if space should be tried given the cost that comes with it. I do, as there are knock-on benefits every time humanity tries something hard. Hard things are just that, and if as a species we want to stop doing the hard things, that's an option. But as evidenced by other nations and private corporations, there is a drive to explore space even though it's hard. NASA has the mission to explore space, and jobs program though it may be on the Space Coast, this is keeping with that mission. Will it succeed? Maybe not; but also remember they don't call these shots. If you actually have a problem with how this money gets spent, or that it's spent at all, Congress is the culprit.
At least the folks in IT. It's a laid-back crew, and it probably helps it's my first IT just where we are support rather than the product being sold. Still would rather not work, but I'm not going to say no to the first job willing to pay me more than 100K a year.
IANAL, but I follow a bunch on Twitter. And all of them are universally being attacked by Musk stans for pointing out the Specific Performance clause. Based on that, the lawyers are probably right.
Specific Performance is a legal term where both sides agree that money is not an adequate remedy if the agreement is breached. It's not just a termination fee: the judge can demand that one party fulfill their side of the agreement rather than pay a sum of money to make it go away.
From a Twitter perspective, $44B US is a lot more than the entire company is worth today. The board would be in breach of their fiduciary duty if they failed to enforce the agreement. They are required by law, in terms of being open to legal liability, to pursue Musk for the purchase and make sure he completes it.
I'm not going to say Musk will lose, but the inclusion of the Specific Performance clause means if he does lose, he'll be forking over more than $1B. Consider the $1B to be a floor, not a ceiling.
https://twitter.com/felixsalmon/status/1525481890643337216