It's been tried and doesn't work. Heck, Britain's fertility rate was several times higher when the masses lived in slums and worked in mills until they died in an accident or from respiratory illness.
If you want to increase birth rates you need to stop educating girls beyond what's required to be a mother. But no liberal country can do that so they will die out instead.
Because no-one has been arrested. It appears Big AI can break laws at will with no repercussions.
Democracy is the reason we're ruled by foreign psychopathich billionaires who want to Terminate us. They don't care who you vote for because they've already bought both sides.
"Excluded" with extreme prejudice.
They fed the gullible masses the propaganda about machines doing all the work, but left out the part where the now-useless workers would be Terminated.
"The magic of dots is when they bring you work done the way you would do it, sometimes before you even think to ask...."
Regardless of its faults, China is a serious country like the US and Europe used to be.
Serious countries don't let people with important skills and knowledge travel to hostile countries where they might be kidnapped or defect. It's so obviously a bad idea that it's bizarre that I even have to point it out.
These were people who worked in defence so anywhere behind the Iron Curtain was right out and I imagine Cuba would have been too. Even Austria was considered a risk, probably because so many spies would hang out there from both sides.
Or so they told me. I can't be entirely sure they weren't exagerrating.
You're right. Some of my friends were banned from travel to communist or communist-adjacent countries during the Cold War, by a supposedly 'freedom-loving' country.
And I don't think Western countries typically allow people under investigation for serious crimes to leave unless they're pedos with connections.
NASA followed the "we launch when the paperwork weights more than the rocket" model where everything had to be tested to death on the ground. Even so, many people expected the first Saturn V launch to fail, and they only launched a complete rocket because it was faster than testing the first stage with a mass simulator on top. And it was never fully debugged before the program was shut down.
SpaceX follow the software development model where you break things fast, and complaining that they didn't get to orbit the first time (something they haven't even tried to do before this flight) is like complaining that someone wrote some code from scratch and the first try didn't compile. They've also been able to test a lot of potential failure modes (e.g. deliberately removing heatshield tiles or flying more dangerous reentries) because they're flying often and willing to break things.
One result of this is that a single SLS engine probably costs more than an entire Starship/Super Heavy stack. Even the ones that were taken off Space Shuttles and refurbished.
I don't really care enough about RSA to read deeply into the paper, but it seems to exploit a service that will sign billions of your messages with the secret key that you are trying to crack... which I seem to recall was known to be a potential problem for RSA thirty years ago (so don't do that).
A cheap Windows PC is now around $1,000. If you don't need Windows you can use one of these instead and even at current inflated prices it costs a lot less than that Windows PC.
I also have one running as a frontend to some local AI servers, with Open WebUI, Opencode and other things that don't require much CPU power. I'd rather them running on a box that I can wipe and reinstall if the AI software decides it wants to take over the machine and do dastardly things to it than direct on the users' computer or the AI servers.
"Eat your own slop!"
Of course they know that if people keep feeding slop into the AI training it will just get sloppier and sloppier. But what other data do they have to feed into bigger models now they've already hoovered up pretty much the entire Internet?
"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."
It's interesting that 2001 predicted modern AI so well.
It's all so tiresome.
How's it going to 'replicate it on every vulnerable system it can reach' when big, fat American AI requires several terabytes of RAM, a few million dollars of GPUs and hundreds of kilowatts of power to run?
That ain't gonna run on my dishwasher, no matter how insecure it may be.
The whole thing is simply ludicrous slop to justify regulation to keep competitors out of their market so they won't go bankrupt.
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.
