exe34

I'm closing this down as duplicate and pointless.

Yes, the law is an ass.

This is not idiocracy. It's the prequel. In idiocracy, they understood that they were dumb and put the smart guy in charge.

This looks like the classic "AI can do everybody else's job but mine still needs me".

I know knowledge workers who throw what you give them into the slop machine and return the slop, but I don't need them, I can feed the slop machine myself. I still need those who have experience and taste that the machine hasn't got yet.

Couldn't they just build a runway there for the private jets?

I was referring to the comment about private vs public funding. Yes, the only relevant fact is about the morality of hiding knowledge behind exorbitant pay walls. Academics submit papers freely, and sometimes pay for the privilege, peer reviewers work for free, and then the rent seekers charge everybody to read it. It's immoral. I agree.

> he was again concealing his actions because he knew they were wrong.

No, you conceal your actions if you believe others will try to stop you. It has nothing to do with right or wrong.

What annoys me is that when I asked Claude to use code I had already written with selenium to scrape a web page, it refused and told me it wasn't going to get into an arms race with cloudflare. One rule for them and another for us.

Eh, I assume the humanities are a tiny portion of the funding for academia. Their equipment is what, coloured pencils and expensive tea? Hardly anything compared to a large hadron collider.

Cries in mid2012 mac book air. This one refuses to die, and it does everything I need except LLMs (but I have a desktop with a 3090), so I'm stuck with it...

The only issue right now is that the "free press" begins l belongs to the few. Their purpose is mostly to entertain and drive up antagonism towards the enemies du jour.

The rocket equation is a very harsh mistress.

The waiting list for your mri is going to be very long.

There are other sources of energy. With helium, once it's gone, there's nothing to replace it.

> I can only see Meta dissolving as a solution

I wonder if an alternative could be found - for example the state funds an independent news organisation that gets access to everything they are doing by law, and turns up at offices, and asks questions, joins meetings, etc. Refusing to share information counts as criminal and a director gets shipped to prison every week until the situation resolves itself.

> This is also leading into the prospects of we have these massively profitable corportations who are on the cusp of firing large % of high income people. Whats the tax implication of losing 60K engineering staff level saleries

Muh job creators! You can't tax your way to growth!

Well actually, they are now job destroyers. Tax the fuckers.

Hah I know a professor that retired and never stopped working on his projects. He just stopped handling paperwork at the university.

Nothing is obligatory - you can always choose to starve.

I route my own domain email to Gmail and do a regular Google takeout, but even the domain can be taken away if you're naughty.

I was going to comment "I bet it's pissed" and then worried about drawing dang on myself, but you started it... Also: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1254917172263794.

"Wild? I was absolutely livid!"

Blasphemy, the invisible hand of the market is supposed to ..... somehow lower prices.

Only if they can show their work and argue how they came to the conclusion. Otherwise they have the same "subconscious" bias which is the training corpus.

I have no fingers and I must read Braille. (But I really want to scream).

Yes that's the obvious case for the "we can't be sure". It's the classic example really. It's not what I asked.

Which liberals have been clamouring for gambling ads? Name and shame them!

I've never understood that. There's a claim you are guilty of robbery. You get charged and go to court. You plead not guilty. The da insists and you go to trial. During trial, you manage to provide cctv showing that you were 1000 miles away. The jury says "not guilty".

Is there any reasonable way to say "we don't know, he might be guilty, we just didn't reach 'beyond reasonable doubt '"?

Yes people misuse words on purpose sometimes. I don't know what point you're trying to make here - calling AfD the far right and fascists isn't controversial, just because they don't call themselves socialists like Hitler did.

I think the difficult part may be to explain to your children why you didn't care about their future. I'm guessing you're child-free, or do you home school?

Baby kitty and 1bn people competing for your dinner.

A quick Google suggests 25% of marine life and 1bn people.