You have zero evidence for any of that and the assertion is a retarded as you are.

Trump obviously does not believe there are any unexplainable connections between him and Epstein, or that he ever did anything with Epstein that would ultimately be judged unacceptable by the public.

He cautioned a lot of names would turn up, but also ran on releasing those files. Trump also being Trump expected to win! He knew he'd be in a position to release the files and given his other follow thru probably expected to do. Trump is innocent and he knows he innocent and everyone else will too if the stuff actually comes out.

The real issue with releasing the files is obvious to anyone with two functioning brain cells. After the election Trump found out someone close to him or some critical House, Senate, Court members are really implicated and it really could be anyone including family members. It also might be something like one layer removed, could be some close associate of Bondi or something like that as well. With razor thin majorities nobody knows politically how that plays out or how to deal with it. Naturally nobody told him before hand because they either did not really think he could win, or were just afraid to tell the man bad news (a legitimate problem with Trump style management).

One thing we do have evidence of is that the DOJ is sitting on a lot of information the administration and nominally people like Bondi, Bongino, Patel, have near total procedural control over. The could probably have some LLM redact all the names and address of victims and release it quickly. Would AI get it wrong and enable doxing those people, certainly. However nobody cares about that kind of boobery anymore in government, the public is totally desensitized to it, it would certainly be less of scandal and less of political problem then what they are doing now is for them. So I'd say confidently even as a ardent Trump supporter, he is protecting someone(s) politically important to the GOP or a familiarly member.

I would guess it is pretty common in large enterprises. Most of them will have some custom identity and access management solutions, even if it just glue to make some actions in PeopleSoft/SAP/Pick-your-HR-IS-SaaS-thing trigger events in AD:DS/Entra/Okta/AWS-IAM/etc.

Maybe they don't have an account themselves with access but if they commit some code that gets promoted to production and runs with account privileges that do...well bob's your uncle.

Generally but not always. I used to work with a guy who got promoted to director. He wasn't terribly good at it. It was a shift lower management that he was very good at. However it also represented the change from tactical problem solving to strategic thinking and to pitching ideas and convincing people you mostly report to ie VPs, and C-Suite, vs organizing people who mostly report to you.

It was perfectly clear to everyone, including him after 8 months or so he was just not working out in the new role. Ended up making him a sort of floating-manager-fixer-internal-consultant guy. They'd have him startup new groups, and be made co-manager of struggling groups. He'd get everyone organized and move on. He was great at it. He might even still be there, kinda lost touch. Certainly a "demotion" in terms of authority, but a bet fit for skills and interests. I don't know what it meant for him dollars and cents wise, but I could tell he was lot happy doing that work and getting accolades for it than he had been coming in for the past three months wondering if the CTO was going say "Bob we gotta let you go."

"as it pertains"

was included to acknowledge that TPM does / is used more then secure boot.

I am not ignorant of the topic here at all. The facts are plain, Microsoft and various industry plays got together and created a regime where having your platform be certified as 'secure' is now fully pay-to-play. Anyone else want to offer a PC operating system and have be accepted by the world of media services for DRM, as accepted client for corporate networks that can meat any kind of host-check-posture policy, etc basically has to pay Microsoft to do it!

Got one shred of evidence to the contrary?

Yes TPM at least as it pertains to secure boot is a conspiracy. It sets up a pretty small cabal of organizations who have magic signing authority and only if you pay them or otherwise convince them to extend you the privilege of their blessing are you have to have system that will be considered acceptably secure. Its literally pay-to-play to a private club. If you don't pay then all your users or you as an individual can/are excluded from other commercial activity.

It is pretty much the definition of a conspiracy. You make whatever arguments you want about if there are or are not more workable/just/affordable/etc solutions but you can't argue it isn't a conspiracy because if isn't one then nothing is.

its not going to keep working for much longer either. Sooner rather then later Microsoft is going to start building Windows components with 86_64v3 instruction set requirements. After for the most part there isnt anything on the supported CPU list that is still v2, and little hardware that is v2 AND TPM-2.0 which is not an official requirement.

About the only thing stopping them is probably their enterprise customer that still want to host VDI stuff on private clouds that might have legacy hardware under them.

I have already hit some commercial software that won't run on my Windows 11 VM, when it is running on my AMD-FX8370 box, for instruction set reasons. Reality is if you are trying to run Windows 11 on unsupported hardware you are probably about out of runway anyway. The ISVs are starting to target micro-architecture you can't support. Pretty soon things like Chrome and what not are not going to work either, for actual legitimate reasons of wanting make efficent use of newer hardware. Kaby lake stuff might be have the instructions, not sure, but most of the hardware out there dropped from supported on Win10 to Win11 does not.

Certainly at release time MS was premature with Win11s hardware requirements. However three years later here we are now at a point where at least most of the stuff they have excluded is actually obsolete in meaningful ways.

are you seriously trying to argue the smoking cessation efforts have not been successful?

Its about the general welfare, yes some others will be harmed maybe disproportionately so. Welcome to democracy.

Exactly none, alcoholism killed him, not prohibition. His alcoholism drove him to make dangerous choices and take his chances on even more risky contraband. He could have and presumably would have stopped drinking but for his addiction.

Maybe if prohibition had started sooner, he'd never have become an addict!

Cannabis is still illegal at the federal level and still a violation of all kinds of corporate drug use policies. There is a huge portion of the population that is very much still 'prohibited' in terms of facing serious consequences for using, even in states / locales where it is nominally legal current.

I don't think the we good data on the impact of legalization yet, because it not really legal..It exists in a grey-area. There is probably fairly heavy overlap with the portions of the population that feel free to use it in those localities now with the population that was already using.

Of course the forbidden fruit effect is real. There is no doubt that some kids out there think "boy everyone is so uptight about cigarettes, the must be amazing I am going do whatever I gotta to get hold of some" but that is a lot fewer than number who would try lighting up if it was as easy as pumping a fiver into a vending machines because all their friends are.

Policy choices are a numbers game, what keep most people from harmful additions, its not about being 100% effective.

It might not stop the addicts but it is also fallacious to suggest banning substances and activities has no positive impacts.

Prohibition is looked at as failure but ...

alcohol consumption essentially never returned to where it was on a per-capita basis. How many future addicts did that prevent?

Secondary impacts like domestic violence decline by something like 50% of the rate it had been.

Were the negative effects, yes those are well known and well documented. Prohibition did make a lot of lives better, and it did accomplish a lot of what proponents hoped that it would.

Yeah Al Gore promised us a hockey stick shaped curve dam it!

This nVidia is absolutely all in AI and while I think it is a 'bubble' they will also be the last to be exposed to the pop.

Look at the VC investments and stock prices of the companies delivering AI applications, they are all around that magic 200X earnings number that usually signifies the point beyond which there is not realistic positive return for new investors, unless they happen to get really really lucky and pick the big winner in the specific vertical its kinda like Highlander at this stage, there can be only one.

Think about it like pouring money in IBM because you believed in an OS/2 future in 1988 at that point vs buy MSFT shares; but both were trading at 200X earnings. With MSFT you'd still have made out all right probably, (could not find their actual PE in 88 quickly). My point is there is probably one coding assist, one photo enhancer application, etc to rule them all and everything else will be also-rans in a given vertical. The rest will fold, get acquired cheaply if they have any unique IP, or muddle along without much growth. Unless you picked the big winner you'll never get out what you put in.

On the other hand after each gold rush in a given space peters out, the AI exuberance and capital flows will be pushed into some other vertical in succession. The need for generic-ish hardware good for running ML models will persist. nVidia can expect to keep shoveling chips out the door until either - 1) the market matures and the AI boom full ends, or 2) they hit scaling problems that prevent them from really producing 'better' SI from a performance vs power vs foot print perspective and can't compete with their own previous generation products availible because of the previous vertical app market decline.

The "cloud" is going to be a drag on them too. In the 2000 internet bubble, there was a stigma attached to the used anything, so hardware from failed start ups ended up discounted and sold into secondary markets cheaply. On the hand buying so many units of compute from AWS, well that is a pure commodity and AWS can just leave their compute plant installed and rent it to the next client. Amazon does not need to replace or upgrade it, unless the cost of operation is improved enough to justify the cap-ex. To that end we can expect some flattening of Nvidia sales before they big drop. So you if you watch the quarterly reports, you'll know exactly when to get out. (This is my theory anyway)

I am sure there is a classic try to force new technology onto the old process problem. However I would also guess that the larger the enterprise the more corner cases there are, and GenAI just isn't good at corner cases.

Yes life as a lefty woke scold is tough.

Fun cars are bad because those are for those horrible coal rollers and hicks. EVs are bad because right wing edge lord Elon builds them.

I guess you retards will have to walk!

It is literally a summarization model. Its context window is the text to summarize. It was literally trained on being given text as a context, and summaries as outputs.