If a game is discontinued that's no reason to deprive the willing of ability to host their own servers.

That option adds value long after a company ends support. It's a feature not a barrier to profit.

Blocking RAM upgrades is inexcusable. RAM upgrades are the most basic computer upgrade since the dawn of the PC.

The UK is already overcrowded and property punitively expensive.

Why?

I run a Shopify store, and if anybot wants to buy from me, by all means, and please invite all your bot-friends!

I think the only merchants who should be fearing this are ones relying on brand recognition rather than low prices and good products, since bots have more time to "shop around".

BTW, this also applies to old games. Have an old game that no longer runs on modern operating systems? In Europe, you have the right to task an AI to fix it so it will run.

Adding *new features*, mind you, is trickier. You're not allowed to decompile and alter a program to add new features, but you *are* allowed to decompile for interoperability purposes. So you are within your rights to task an AI to decompile a program to figure out how to link a mod into it and then to write a mod.

In Europe, it is. Article 6 of the Software Directive grants an "interoperability exemption". The lawful licensee of software has the statutory right to strip DRM in order to achieve interoperability. Any EULA terms that prohibit reverse engineering for interoperability are automatically treated as void. Article 5(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC also grants the ability to decompile to fix bugs that impair the ability to use the software, even if the supplier prohibits it. So long as you don't then start sharing your "offline mode" version of the software, you're within your rights

People in Europe are within their rights to task an AI to decompile and tweak a game they own make an "offline mode" version of it, or to create their own servers or whatnot if the manufacturer plans to shut them down or otherwise strip features that the user paid for.

Of course, the US is less consumer-friendly in this regard.

Next the agents drive the actual browser, and thus become indistinguishable from a meatsack.

Information wants to be free!

I honestly appreciate that.

I say the alternative is to move the work in-house.

Jobs fundamental to national security should be government jobs.

I say they don't want them to be because you have to treat government employees like people, by and large, unless they're getting Doge'd or what have you. Most don't get paid very well, which is unfortunate on multiple levels, but they do generally get pretty good benefits. And, you could address the pay gap between private and public sector jobs. You'd have to, since people can move to other countries.

Anyway back on topic, I think we should reduce the waste of our contracted systems horseshit and treat national security like it's a matter of national security. I don't know about nationalizing OpenAI or not, although I'm open to them being paid a fair market rate if it's the solution the USG decided to bring in house instead of starting development of a new system, or backing expansion of a lesser system, but it would have to be honestly valued in light of doing that as a comparison. And in the bargain, you have to take into account the value and relevance of the copyrighted material they absorbed, and the state's role in its creation.

Suggesting that OpenAI is "the United States" is fascism, by the way.

Nobody asked you to show your meth.

My ex-boss got an $83,000 PPP "loan" and bought a travel trailer with it.

I don't think that's true at all. I think the capitalist economies are simply much better at exporting the oppression, because they can take part in globalism. Meanwhile there's still plenty of domestic oppression to go with it. We still have literal slave labor in this country; the 13th amendment permits slavery as punishment for commission of a crime, so laws which coerce prisoners into laboring for little to no money (and certainly less than minimum wage) are fully legal.

Average worker productivity has multiplied manifold and the cost of food production has sunk since we developed automation, but somehow we're supposed to believe that it's become onerous for our society to feed people when we work more hours than medieval serfs? The math doesn't math there.

As for Islamic countries, there's only two that ban women from driving: Afghanistan and Turkmenistan - both de facto / arbitrary / adminstrative bans rather than official bans (e.g. refusing to issue/renew licenses, requiring guardians for long-distance travel, or things of that nature). Saudi Arabia revoked their ban in 2018. And Iran has always allowed women to drive (though they have to cover their hair while driving).

*Full, nationwide bans*? No. But the Soviet Union banned women from many types of driving (as "arduous and hazardous"), such as driving subways, long-haul freight, various kinds of heavy construction machinery, etc. These were inherited and retained post-Soviet states, including Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, though the lists of jobs has dropped over time. Even today, in Belarus (where Lukaschenko talks up the nation's foundational Christian values), under Article 262, women can't drive a firetruck or operate heavy machinery with significant vibration (under the grounds of "safeguarding womens' reproductive health")

Heck, even in the US, up until 2015,, women couldn't drive a tank, an IFV, a mobile artillery piece, operate a submarine (until 2010), or a number of other military roles. And Hegseth wants to reverse the earlier decisions. And Trump also seems to have it in for women as even commercial airline pilots as well.