Republicans cannot be elected here. Just won't happen any time soon.

So Republicans join the Democrats. Local media calls these people "moderates" - no, it doesn't make much sense, just the accepted code word. Most of the current batch are funded by more or less reactionary tech billionaires. (The older set are less, the newer ones more.)

So yeah. You have to read past the label. Democrats here are such a big tent that we let Republicans run things a lot of the time if they wear a fake mustache and mumble something vaguely progressive-sounding now and then. But they do whatever's good for AirBNB and Salesforce when they're not servicing commercial real estate.

The SF Democratic machine is all in on Flock. That might have something to do with the Flock being in the SF Democratic Party.

Mar raised another concern: Two of the committee's current members -- Lily Ho and Trevor Chandler -- work for Flock. Last month, the San Francisco Standard reported that a prior version of Mar's resolution was removed from the party's agenda by a subcommittee chaired by Ho. Neither Ho nor Chandler offered to abstain from voting on Wednesday. The committee does not have rules related to conflicts of interest for issues like this one, Tung told Mar. They then proceeded to count both Ho and Chandler's votes.

I'd like to award you "dumbest possible mix of misunderstanding the text combined with missing the point, garnished with a sprig of self-satisfaction and a dash of ignorance".

Watch for it in the mail.

This looks like the final cell-phonification of the Mac. I'm bummed.

But they're right - if you assume that a significant fraction of Mac users are going to install some sort of third-party interface with an LLM, it is either significantly extend and harden the security perimeter deeper into the OS or your customers will routinely have everything exfiled as a matter of course, and it would just be cheaper to make iCloud into an anonymous FTP site.

And given Zuckerbook's demonstrated willingness to brazenly, actively subvert OSes, I'm willing to bet they're going to go Russian on their subjects, er, customers, anyway. ("You probe with bayonets: if you find mush, you push.")

It will probably be what finally pushes me to a Linux laptop, though. I'm old, I spend a lot of time at the shell. I like Macs because they're great unix workstations, still. But I don't see how you can accommodate both people like me and people who need to be protected not only from themselves, but from Zuckerbook and worse.

And they're a much bigger market than people like me. And "AI is the Footure."

Yep.

Oh, sorry. It really is hard to tell here.

You seem to be complaining that some unspecified music awards body didn't act, and instead one composed of "nerds" did.

Aside from a classic case of "Area Man Yells at TV", and apparently being disparaging of nerds on a site subtitled "News for Nerds", I simply don't understand the complaint.

Are you also angry at biologists for naming something after Gary Larson because someone you think is cooler didn't?

Your pretty fantasy dissolves in the face of police omerta.

All of your "good" cops are complicit in the acts of the thieves, racists, and psychopaths. They more than tolerate it - they actively impede attempts to bring these criminals to justice. It is literally a mockery of justice by the very enforcers who are supposed to fight for it.

Anyone remember all the performative outrage about "Stop Snitching" stuff? Just another attack on rival gangs.

The man at CHMR who would have been doing the target analysis of the girl's school (former Senior Advisor for CHMR & the Civil Environment Lead to QA/QC) has thoughts on this matter, for anyone who cares.

Use-once and throw away.

Hell, if they get in your way, throw them off the boat, we'll go to Costco in the morning.

And some as far as ruining businesses, eh, you gotta break some eggs. (No, I don't talk about the price of eggs.) This is about habituating the populace to domestic military presence, not something trivial like people's livelihoods.

It is exactly the same mechanism as special interest group politics: concentrated interest, diffuse harm.

You think that because the fanbois flock to Blue Angel celebrations. What you don't see is all the people cursing at them everywhere else.

They are pushing to have antitrust regulations against the various labs dropped so they can "collude" on slowing down. This will of course require banning open models and disallowing access elsewhere.

Captive market, increasingly captive citizens, unconstrained capital openly colluding with government.

Where have I seen this story before...

If you make deals with fascists, you're a suicidal sucker.

It demonstrates weakness, is interpreted as submission, and Stumpy be back with more demands. If you grow a pair you might have a fight, but probably not - he's a fucking coward, but more relevantly, he's desperate to avoid people publicly standing up to him.

The answer is "Eat shit you goofy fuckup, give us the money you're illegally withholding."

And what does the language matter anyway when you can now type in pseudocode into Copilot and ask it to form perfect equivalent code in any language?

There are a few pressures that interact to lead to this.

First, you have bureaucratic imperatives, like all large orgs. The iron law of a bureaucracy is the bureaucracy fights to maintain the staus quo. This includes the existence of the bureaucracy, the continuation of which is the highest priority. The number of organizations that have voluntarily disbanded without outside pressure is not zero, but close enough to demonstrate the rule.

Second, you have leadership, which can't really do anything of their own volition that would materially change things. Between parents, politicians, unions, and the reality of budgets[1] and students' situations, it is extremely rare that they have a realistic way to improve things, even assuming they'd otherwise be capable of doing so.

Third, you have parents, or more specifically parent pressure groups. They can make an administrator or teacher's life miserable and there's no good way to counter it, so they tend to get what they want. The good news is they only tend to flare up once in a while, like the "Moms for Liberty" who were deeply concerned withsexual deviance.

Forth, you have both the state and federal bureaucracies, with their own complicated imperatives. State variation is high, ranging from neglect to micromanaging and well-meaning (if frequently clueless) through antagonistic (and frequently clueless). In any case, these tend combine onerous ongoing reporting requirements that costs labor on bullshit with random big mandates that scramble everything you're trying to do.

Fifth, you have teacher's unions. They're doing what they're supposed to - fighting for their members' interests. Those interests run from generally good ideas to self-serving ones. How one feels about that is obviously heavily political in the US; personally, I look at how little money they make for their education requirements and all the shit they have to put up with and marvel that anyone wants to do it.

So now in walks Google or OpenAI with more money than god and an invisible study buddy for each of your kids. Depending where you are, politicians are leaning on you to get with the program, hoping they can downsize away teacher's unions/"win the future"/some of them probably sincerely think this is good.

And then you get the bandwagon effect. Some other school district publishes dodgy, rosy numbers, the robot sales guy sends that article to your supervisor, and suddenly even when everyone knows how this is going to end, the pressure to do it is overwhelming.

A generation later, a new version of the robot sales guy comes knocking...

[1] People frequently point out how much we spend on public education to claim this isn't a problem, but it is. The issue is not absolute numbers, but distribution. We throw a lot of money at some schools and not enough at others. A drive through the rural South looking at the state of school buildings should be enough to tell you there's (more than one) thing wrong with allocation.