I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Of course when prices go up people buy less. They can't afford to buy as much as before.

The rest of your post is just a spin. You're trying to claim that "they don't need it". Yes, they can make do with 2 pencils instead of 35, but that's just saying you're in a recession, and people can't afford to live at the same level as before.

I think it's a viable way of "coding", but if the result doesn't compile ("imaginary APIs") or doesn't fit the requested style, then it shouldn't be submitted.

I certainly let AI code things for me for research or as utilities, without attempting to fully understand the code. I ensure it does what I want and often try to get the opinion of more than one AI. It's a nice tool for getting stuff done that's not my main work. But submitting such code would require at least a code review and ensuring it works. At least where I work, doing a code review doesn't mean that you fully understand what the other person did. We have different expertise. It's does help find problems with both code and documentation. I think it's reasonable to apply this to AI-generated code (although it's probably best to assume that it's an error-prone developer).

I assume that Aviation Pete simply didn't read anything but the title.

Anyway, I replied not because of this but because of your sig "A cat can't teach a dog to bark." I'm sure this means to say something, but considering that dogs don't need to be taught to bark, I do not think it means what you think it means.

A minor addition to Windows compatibility that will sway very few people in Linux's direction.

Surely if it's decided that disclosing something you don't like is against the First Amendment, then any libertarian will be able to say that disclosing their income and expenses forces them to "serve as a mouthpiece for ideas with which they disagree."

Well, you know, you can continue to get security updates for Windows 10 for another year. It's not hard.

And if you're still on hardware that doesn't support Windows 11, then you could probably upgrade to a new PC for under $200. If you have a device that old you probably don't require a lot from your PC.

It's possible to get another year of Windows 10 support by either backing up files to OneDrive, redeeming reward points of paying $30. So claiming that Microsoft has pulled support is factually wrong. Sure, extended support isn't automatic, but it's also not that hard.

Thanks for the detailed and interesting reply.

I don't think that Microsoft's TPM decision was arbitrary or benefits them or most of their partners. Forcing a standard is rarely a benefit to large corporations, more like a financial liability. But it's a good way to get the ecosystem to adopt something if it feels beneficial. That said, at this point TPM 2.0 is standard, and I think that Microsoft can relax the requirement. It's kind of like DRM in games: I can see why publishers want it, but once the game is old enough, it remains a liability.

I think it's also worth noting that Microsoft doesn't stop Windows 10 support on October 14. Support will continue for another year, and people can get this support as simply as backing files to OneDrive.

Windows 11 is compatible with CPUs sold in the last 7-8 years (Ryzen 2000 and newer, Core 8000 and newer). Considering business cycles, most businesses should have a Windows 11 compatible PC. For consumers, 7-8 years is also typically longer than the upgrade cycle. I know some people use older PCs, but the 40% figure feels high, and some of the people using older PCs are techies who might already use Linux.

This seems to imply that you have some idea. Can you say it? Because I honestly have no idea why anyone would attack a middling distro. Sure, it's used by Valve, and Steam OS is successful, but an attack like this would have no effect on Steam OS, only on Arch, which by itself is not near the top of distros.

So please clarify who you think might benefit from this.

It mostly does have to do with "automation" vs. "real people". For example, as a protection against scalping, where bots can be used to buy products quickly at release, to be sold at a profit, instead of letting legitimate customers do the buying.

While ChatGPT may be smarter than most slashdot posters (based on the responses here), and probably also knows chess better than most (it's trained on millions of games), but unfortunately it's not geared to show that. I'm too lazy to dig up the results from the person who researched this, but apparently there's a particular version of ChatGPT 3.5 which is decent at chess out of the box, and others require specific prompting to get on the right track.

ChatGPT would likely have still lost to Carlsen even with the right version or the right prompting, but still, it would be interesting to see what kind of game Carlsen would have gotten had he known the right way to get ChatGPT to play.

If people don't follow links, they see fewer ads, and they might also not follow sponsored links. So I'm inclined to believe that this will end up reducing the revenue of Google. Seems to me like Google will have to replace that with "AI ads" or whatever.

Agreed. That's why AI in general is helpful. It can quickly return answers that previously took longer to find. Sure, it's not completely trustworthy, but for simple questions it's most often good enough.

Sure, there are a lot of movies, but I think that's just half the problem. As I mentioned, I feel that the Marvel TV series are more of an issue. These ad many many hours of superhero stuff to watch, and the problem is that movies then reference the series. You can't go to a movie and fully understand it without these references.