Or the money Meta has burned off trying to be something that they aren't, the ashes of failed products needing to be brushed under the rug with fresh revenues.

I use LibreWolf on a couple of machines. It's OK, but it evolves slowly. They deserve the money I donated to Mozilla. But the distros don't include the LibreWolf version; Ubuntu as an example, puts in a godforsaken package island.

If the LibreOffice folks could somehow hug the LibreWolf people, distros could take a turn for the better.

As we watch CoPilot failures, AI browsers no one wants, a change for Firefox users to AI would be plainly a solution looking for a problem.

If Firefox can be successfully forked to a non-AI version, I'll go with that. Libre-stuff would get a great boost by navigating around the inevitable wasteland that Firefox will become.

Strangely, products taking an anti-AI stance are starting to thrive again. I hope their board notices and changes direction towards optimizing Firefox, getting rid of their new mercenary telemetry stance, and gets back to the basics of just doing an open good job.

There are those lacking even a nanogram of altruism, and won't experience it ever, through their lifetime. They may have grandiose masks for the actions they take, but they're as empty as the AI they pimp.

We're in an era where empathy is taught to be hidden, that Darwinism must rule, kleptocracy is good, and inclusiveness is a bad idea.

Each of us can adopt this attitude, or reject it. Today is a first step in either direction.

Right.

It takes both money and asserts power and control against states specifically. The compliance policy, the nanosecond it's enforced, breaches the 10th. The conspiracy to breach the 10th would be mooted.

And yes, it's mob boss shit. And what he's done to universities also breaches numerous US Constitutional Amendments, but because universities are at the nipple of federal dollars, they dare not move. This is the universities' problem, the subservience and fealty to new royalty. That they don't litigate effectively shows the strength of their spine.

The MAGA governors in lockstep with The Executive are now losing battles, viz Indiana's rejection of redistricting for gerrymandering purposes.

Look where DOGE is today, disbanded and debunked, leaving only damage and disservice in its wake, many battles in the courts lost, and no happiness left behind.

There are ways to prevent a race to the bottom. Law with spine, rather law with genuflection will turn the tide, as it has in the past.

Ah, we disagree. Read the 10th Amendment. We can add the Commerce Clause, and add a side dash of grab-and-go (read your law books).

Thanks otherwise for the kind and thoughtful words; I know they took a lot of effort.

It's PR and fodder for the fan club. It's plainly illegal, and yet another slide into corruption as the AI movement loots treasuries and pockets, while producing nothing but high-wattage goo.

It's a historic boondoggle where he makes trillions of dollars.

Spending the funds on climate change mitigation, population sustainability, and curing the assets gap ought to come first. That's a problem that "scientists" need to chained to solve before dubious excursions to other planets.

The co-generation idea has been around for decades. Although there are some successful implementations, there are many problems to surmount to make it practical and profitable.

One of them is energy output efficiency for the lifecycle of the heat source, customers to buy the energy output, competition from other energy sources (like artificially low petro-energy costs), and sufficiently cheap capital to make the return on investment work over the projected life.

Didn't happen before, and it's unlikely to happen now, despite the cool-factor of the idea.

... you have to drink the KoolAid.

Will his co-CEO AI Teammate take his job?

Will Amazon's Teammates effectively infect the other AI Teammates to recommend Amazon's products, delivered by robots, for gear made by robots, to robot purchasers?

Will all the AI and robotry be able to form a new society without those pesky humans-- now unemployed? We wait with baited breath for our new AI overlords.

It's a generous gift, if a bend of the knee to his royal lowness. Let the monarchy reign. We have work to do.

Consider that maybe they won't work at Starbucks, a scarier thought given the lowered standards in some institutions.

Interactive voice response systems are actually customer repulsion systems used to keep costs down. Same answer for various chat systems. Cutting labor costs is the hyperfocus of many organizations, to their great peril.

Another side of this is that let's say we took 12Million taxpayers off the roles. They won't need housing, so mortgage lenders, builders, etc, don't get any revenue for them (data centers *might*).

They don't need healthcare, or hospitalization, pharma, etc. They drive no cars, need no roads, pay no fuel taxes. They have no progeny, no schools, and can't vote or donate to campaigns.

They don't drink much water, rarely poop, suck lots of air, and need wicked constant energy to do their job (if that's what you call it).

Commerce isn't bad, indeed it's how our civil cultures survive and sustain themselves. Remove the human elements and there's a very mixed result, with the reputation of getting blood from rocks, repulsing those that need actual customer service, and generally injecting more mud than high quality/low cost lubrication to revenue streams.

But hey, I'm not liplocked to VC udders. Races to the bottom are never fun, and while I find it's OK to have shareholders, some shareholders will do anything to milk that cow, it is what we teach MBAs today.

An original work is an original work. Every work is influenced somehow. Foisting AI as your own humanity is your own death. I'll die another way.

While it's true that the value of content is driven down by the signal to noise ratio, AI being noise, the fact that AI can't be copyrighted is an important distinction. Only humans can copyright, a court-tested fact.

Does that fact increase the quality of content? No. What it does mean is that humans can monetize their works and eat; AI can make content and sell you ads or influence you to buy something.

This reduces to a question: Do you want to feed humans or the AI muck? The choice is yours. Some humans probably don't deserve the feeding; the AIs are driving up all of your costs, from the power grid energy bills to the new AI trappings being foisted on you during your tech experience. You decide.