zugi

Thanks for pointing this out!

It seems obvious in retrospect, but the fact that SpaceX will be "valued" at $1.75 trillion after the IPO is irrelevant when only $75 billion worth of its stock will be publicly traded.

$75 billion in float-adjusted market cap puts it around 180-190th in the S&P 500. So sure, it will likely get in there eventually, but there's no rush to bend the rules to get it in right away.

> using AI to do their accounting and bookkeeping

A friend gave AI access to his accounts to summarize his finances.

On reviewing the AI-generated report, he spotted a $500 monthly loan payment that he didn't recognize. He asked AI where it came from, and AI admitted that it was a mistake.

Perhaps in its training data, most people have a $500 loan payment, so AI just stuck one in there.

A late 2024 international report https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-demand-from... predicts that by 2035, datacenter electricity usage will increase from 2024's 1.5% to 2-4.4% of global usage. Currently about 1/3 of datacenter electricity usage is for AI (0.5% of that 1.5%), though that will presumably increase.

LLMs are software. They take inputs and produce outputs. What humans choose to do with those inputs and outputs is up to us.

Getting the pope involved makes it all seem more mystical and magical than it is. And these remarks only further feed that delusion. Regardless of intent, it seems to just feed the AI marketing and hype.

The article is thin on details about the sharing of names. If US companies responded to US government inquiries about speech regulation by forwarding the emails they received from Dutch regulators, those would unsurprisingly include regulators' names.

The article title seems like click bait, even though the article content goes on to have interesting details about EU attempts to reduce dependence on US technology companies.

> We've seen how irrational and ignorant stock traders are from other publicly traded space companies.

Absolutely true, but ignorant stock traders making irrational trades only matters if company management pays attention to them. Musk will maintain complete control of SpaceX even after the IPO, so he can focus on long-term value rather than short-term ups and downs.

Of course, over time, if more shares are issued, this may change.

Stallman tried to introduce the term "intellectual monopoly", which fits better, since they really are monopolies granted by the government for limited periods of time, intended to promote progress in science and the useful arts.

"Property" was chosen specifically as a bait and switch. It tries to get people to take a concept that has been understood for thousands of years for physical objects, and apply it to this novel century-or-two long experiment for encouraging the production of easily-copyable things.

Fortunately however it's not hard to tell when people calling others "complete moron" are acting out of bad faith.

> However, I have sadly come to feel that many journalists who write about science, and perhaps even some scientists, see their role as activism toward a specific outcome rather than discovering and describing reality as it exists.

That's not a feeling, for journalism anyway it's an explicit fact. The Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC) - the primary agency that reviews and accredits journalism programs across the United States and whose mandates directly shape the curricula of over 100 universities - has changed their standards over the years away from emphasis on truth and towards emphasis on advocating change to institute certain policies. See https://www.acejmc.org/about/strategic-plan . They still mention truth, but almost tangentially among long lists of outcomes that journalists must pursue. The current generation of journalists were trained by these principles.

The Associated Press (AP) StyleBook https://www.apstylebook.com/ similarly polices the language that journalists use to favor certain policy outcomes, with some news organizations requiring compliance as a condition of employment.

I think it's more accurate to call the EU Parliament a "loophole that needs closing."

> I read somewhere it comes from training on YouTube audio

Does it also insert "please like & subscribe?"

Ture but it starts off with basically argument from ignorance (or lack of imagination):

> there's basically no reason to create this photo other than to mislead the authorities

There are many other "for fun" possibilities: impress his friends, impress internet followers, impress a girl, play around with AI...

They've charged him with "disrupting government work by deception." It will be interesting to see whether that South Korean law requires proof of intent or just proof of the consequences. If he directed to authorities, he's in trouble, but if he posted it anywhere else it likely qualifies as free speech.

I started listening to the podcast, but first they made me listen to several ads.

One was for a company that survives by selling ads - basically this was an ad selling ads! Given the title of the podcast, I assumed this was some sort of meta-joke, but evidently not.

So the sponsors of this podcast apparently believe that internet advertising works.

You sir or ma'am have greatly improved my quality of life!

Since you opted to engage in this off-topic discussion, I'll just point out that the overwhelmingly vast majority of the one billion or so guns currently on the planet have never been used to kill anyone. It's statistically far more accurate to say their primary purpose is to defend, with killing much further down on the list.

> Guns primary purpose is to kill

Fark is farking great! Though its old-school HTML doesn't flow so well on mobile.

Can we get the best of 1999 with the best of 2026? Probably not...

Adding "bullshit" to a sentence does nothing to hide this kind of ambulence-chasing vulturism and exploitation - in fact it rather highlights it.

I mean, one of the legal firms behind this is Milberg PLLC, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milberg, who has been charged with illegally paying plaintiffs to sue in order to enrich themselves.

To be really fair, they're being sued by lawyers hoping to take 50% of the proceeds, or 50% of some settlement that they get by shaking down Costco via threats to its reputation.

> That plan enraged customers

There is nothing wrong with a taxpayer who paid taxes later ruled illegal filing a request for a refund. This lawsuit is likely a shakedown opportunity for lawyers to enrich themselves. How Costco allocates the money they get back is up to them.

It would be, unless China isn't yet militarily ready.

Also if China's Taiwan plan includes using surrogates like Iran to cause simultaneous trouble, then reducing Iran's capability asynchronously eliminates one US worry during a Taiwan scenario.

> Turns out being a Jesus nerd was a secret requirement. Wish they could just put that in the job requirements.

Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act, in making religious hiring discrimination illegal, sometimes just drives it underground. Over the years it's done more good than harm, but at a certain point it may be time to let those who want to hire only Jesus nerds self-select.

Automated voice systems that try to sound human but are in fact purely scripted are insanely annoying. E.g. "I think you said 'windshield', is that correct? ... Got it, thanks!"

If you only have 4 options, just give me the old school list of voice options and I'll press 1 through 4, in less time, and being only moderately annoyed.

But a knowledgeable AI system as described in the article - that knows what it knows and tells you when it doesn't - could work great. If it had access to inventory and calendar, it might have worked for you. The question is whether the implementation lives up to the high expectations set by the articles.

#1 is the symptom, #2 is the problem.

High levels of home ownership combined with "local control" and "democracy" enables the "haves" who already own homes to weaponize government to keep supply low and home values high. Zoning restrictions, building codes, taxes, and other government tools are brought to bear to support this. The "have nots" don't have a chance.

Austin seems to be a counter-example when they "instituted an array of policy reforms" in 2015 that showed great results. Sadly the key may be appealing to the greed of existing homeowners. Changing zoning to allow tall apartment buildings where single family dwellings once stood lets existing home owners make even more money by selling than they'd make by continuing to restrict supply. While it's sad if that's the only path to success, we'll have to take small successes where we can find them.

There are a bunch of free or cheap alternative apps. Probably not as smoothly integrated, but years ago a change to Samsung's terms popped up in the health app; I saw it said they could do anything they want with my private health data, so I rejected the terms and stopped using it.

I've had Samsung phones for years and never made a Samsung account. Every few weeks my phone suggests signing in or accepting new terms and conditions, and I refuse.

I know Google is mining my information, but I convince myself I'm "sticking it to the man" and taking at least one small stand...

Just 4 hours before this announcement, Cappy posted a video explaining that special forces may be planning to put some "boots on the ground" to take over that island: https://youtube.com/watch?v=5u8yCP5WQVw

Whether that's correct or it's just a bombing campaign, his description of the island, its importance for oil exports, its layout and defenses is interesting.

Is that PiPyPy or PiPyPI?

The US Constitution authorizes Congress to enact copyrights with limited scope:

> To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries

One could argue that a colored box promotes neither science nor useful arts, and therefore applying any copyright protection at all to this non-useful art is unconstitutional.

It's an interesting development because wars haven't traditionally been waged predominantly with software. But soon perhaps they will be.

While the government is accustomed to complying with software licensing rules, indeed it is not accustomed to being limited in warfare, so the two have now come into an interesting conflict.

Interestingly Iran had moderately good relations with Russia, to whom they sold drones, and China, to whom they sold oil. But indeed not enough for either to help defend Iran.

With Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran, the US is bottling up Russian and Chinese global influence into smaller regional influence.