Very few people will benefit, given it's limited to whoever bought an iPhone in a specific month before the policy change took effect. Everyone before that had 2 months of service, everyone after it can't sue.

> Section 230 protects people and organizations who run websites which allow the public to post content to them without approval from prosecution, so long as they comply with certain legal requirements like declaring your point of contact for having material which remains unlawful removed, which in turn requires that you pay a yearly fee. (This requirement is not part of section 230, it was instituted later.)

This is complete bullshit.

Section 230 covers websites, but it also covers everything else. It is absolutely not necessary to register your website or put contact details on it for S.230 purposes. Perhaps you're confusing it with the DMCA, an entirely different law?

Section 230 covers everything. Web. Email. IRC. Usenet. Individual IP packets. etc. Nobody is responsible for the actions of a third party, period (except copyright infringement which is covered by the DMCA) no matter what the medium.

Which is as it should be.

I would assume he is given he described exactly what happened when he tried to not set up a Wi-Fi connection.

You're quoting someone as saying we're as far away as we ever were and claiming it's nonsense because nobody knows how far away we are?

You're not addressing the issue implied and nothing you're saying remotely contradicts it.

How can an atheist hate God? Do you know what those words mean?

Science fiction has generally answered that multiple times, a giant AI of the type proposed (and unlikely to happen - spicy autocomplete is not enough for AGI, it's not even 1% of what's needed) is not going to be located in a single place.

The obsession with cloud computing over the last 15 years has basically created an infrastructure for a supposed electronic intelligence to exist that cannot be easily depowered or disconnected.

(Note that I don't think an AGI is around the corner, just that it's not going to be running on a System/370 in your basement, liable to be disconnected when you trip over the power cord. This is an issue people have thought about and come up with solutions for over and over again, and it's the same solution each time, and yes, unfortunately, it's viable.)

Nobody said he didn't have "accomplishments". They said he's a sociopath and has no good sense of anything.

Basically Musk made it rich out of luck after Peter Thiel and friends bought his payment company. He managed the merged company, PayPal, for a short while before Thiel kicked him out for being incompetent.

He decided he really liked what Tesla was doing (not hard to do!) and recognized that US oil consumption was, at the time, considered a national security issue and felt one way or another a car company like Tesla would get help - so he bought it, took it over (this time with nobody in control enough to say no), and, well, kept fucking up. BUT because the product was compelling (not something he did, merely something he recognized) and because he is a decent salesman, the company managed to avoid bankruptcy, and the cult around him forced the share price through the roof.

I mean, this is a company where one of the stories told about "how good" Musk is involved Musk realizing, days away from bankruptcy, that Tesla hadn't actually fulfilled most of its pre-orders, and maybe it would be a good idea to get the cars rotting on the lots out to the people who put down deposits. So he pressganged everyone at Tesla, even the computer programmers, into calling everyone who put down a deposit to ask them if they wanted to buy the cars.

This is told, by Musk fans, as a story about how great a manager and CEO Musk is, rather than a sign Tesla is abysmally run.

Then there's SpaceX. Which *is* well run! Yes! But it's also famous for having an entire team of people whose job it is to manage Musk when he visits because they know he's awful.

Then there's the Boring Company. Uhm. OK. What happened to that again?

Then there's X. He takes over the second most popular social media network on Earth, whose infrastructure worked, alienates and/or fires most of those working for it, makes grand pronouncements about the technology that are clearly ill informed, and the thing he turned it into is... terrible. I mean, I can't even see a thread any more without logging in. And if someone links to a post all I see is the post itself (no replies) and a lot of spinning gifs. Meanwhile everyone that was worth following has fled to Threads, Bluesky, or the fediverse. The only reason it hasn't crashed out completely is inertia. And's clearly losing more money than it was when it was independent.

He's not a great business man, he's someone who knew what to invest in, but everything he's micromanaged has either failed, or succeeded despite him.

Yes he has accomplishments, but he's nonetheless awful. He's a walking demonstration that America needs to get over its obsession and worship of rich people. They aren't that smart. In fact, most of the richest among us seem to be the biggest idiots.

Not even slightly. They may have their roots in C, but there is more in them that's not-C than C.

C# (and Java, from which it derives) aren't even C-like, they just borrow C syntax. C++ and Objective C could be considered extensions, but C# and Java are entirely different languages with a completely different memory model.

C# takes a different approach, you target a specific .NET framework rather than "C#". That way it's been able to develop, but backward compatibility is still a thing.

I think at some point Oracle or Sun should have released a "Java 2" which included the lessons learned from the first iteration. No backward compatibility issues because Java 1 would still be a thing, but Java 2 could have fixed the holes and ensured the language had the features that are currently half-assed.

Not really, as far as programming languages, a pirate's first love is the C.

> and programmers want to use Java

Is meant to read

> and if programmers want to use Java

*sigh* Second time today.

WebAssembly means that, no, Javascript is not the only language available for manipulating web pages on the client side any more, it can be anything you want. If Java is ready for that, and programmers want to use Java, there's no reason they shouldn't - it's a safer, more robust, language than Javascript. Of course, they can also use Rust, Go, or a whole host of other languages.

Also, FWIW, applets have been dead for a decade or more now, no mainstream web browser has supported them since 2017. The article is about Oracle removing the obsolete infrastructure from the core Java libraries. The only reason they've sat on their hands about it is that in theory a non-applet might still reference some class intended for applet usage - perhaps because a JAR might be dual mode, or because an applet ported to the desktop might have legacy references.

C# is a better language over all. Java has suffered for a variety of reasons:

- An insistence on backward compatibility, which is why, for example, generics are kinda half-assed, the standard library has lots of gotchas as functionality was grafted on poorly.
- Apparent confusion of "slowly" with "carefully" which means many features are missing decades later, and what finally gets in there seems to be half a solution, as if the Java team wants to see whether it works before finishing it. The "AutoCloseable" try-with-resources thing seems a classic example (as well as hampered by the compatibility obsession)
- Oracle just doesn't seem interested in it as a project to invest resources into improving
- Oracle keeps playing licensing games which is pushing away a sizable amount of the community- especially that part they need to attract, skilled academics and other experts who aren't going to contribute to a proprietary project outside of being hired to work on it.

And... hate to say it, but Microsoft does know what it's doing for the most part.

But if truth be told, while they're not full replacements (JVM and .NET are far more useful than Slashdot's naysayers like to pretend), most of the mindshare lost from Java is going to Rust and Go. Rust solves a specific issue the JVM has, albiet with its own problems and requiring a mindset change from programmers, and Go is more Java-like but loses the bureaucracy overheads and compiles to executables directly.

Should you choose Java for your next project? If you're familiar with Java, and/or more comfortable programming in it than C# take a look at Go. If you need something more cross platform or something more modular, making Java and .NET the only platforms you'd look at, C# is way more advanced than Java ever will be.

Not trying to say Java is bad. It's just fallen behind, and Oracle sucks.

Applets were a problem for a variety of reasons. The JVM at the time was buggy, Netscape was buggy, and the combination of the two could lead to crashes. Additionally several bugs in the JVM were actual security holes giving Java an unfair reputation for poor security (it wasn't Java or Java's design, it was a crap implementation.) And I don't think browser makers ever quite embraced the idea despite believing early on that Java was "the future".

In part, the latter was because of a combination of Microsoft going anti-Java when Sun made it clear they weren't open to forks, and Netscape just realizing it was weird to tie Netscape to a specific programming language and associated environment, especially one that wasn't quite sure what it wanted to be.

Meanwhile your views about Java's UX capabilities were almost certainly based upon the fact applets had only two ways to interact with users - pop-up windows and fixed sized rectangles on web pages. Neither were ideal.

What TFA talks about is arguably the way Java should have gone, with the browser dictating the environment in which apps should run, and the functionality being much more advanced than what was available in a browser in 1998. A lot of where browsers have headed has been the wrong direction - it shouldn't take gigabytes to render pages just because they have some fancy DOM stuff on them - but at least one can argue they're pretty close to feature complete right now. WebAsm with a modern DOM is a hell of an improvement on the rectangles.

> I'm always baffled by the insistence of Rust, Java, or other modern programming languages

should be

> I'm always baffled by the insistence by opponents of Rust, Java, or other modern programming languages

This has been your reminder that Slashdot's refusal to allow people to edit their own comments just generates more heat than light.