NSA has a better ring to it than A.I. Force.

Being in a psychiatric hospital for an indeterminate period, sitting in a wheelchair wondering when Nurse Ratchet is going to get around to changing your diaper isn't exactly "Getting Off", just saying.

I remember a time when any stupid idea that you could put ".com" on would get shit tons of investor money. The only thing it produced mostly was bankruptcies and the opportunity for small companies to buy needed equipment for pennies on the dollar. This AI craziness strikes me the same way. AI can be useful but it'll never be the "be all things", they rarely to live up to the hype. I've seen it too many times, the dotcom boom-bust, nano-technology, Ruby on rails; anyway COBOL had a good run.

I really do think coding using AI tools is a bit faster, at least it seems that way to me. As most of the morning but lengthy work can be done faster by AI.

But I am also pretty sure it's VERY easy to rapidly incur technical debt, especially if you are telling AI to review its own work. Yeah it will do some stuff but who is to say post review fixes it's really better?

More than ever I think the right approach to coding with AI is to build up carefully crafted frameworks that are solid (maybe use AI to help but review and tests very carefully) then allow AI to build on top of solid fundamental structures that you know are solid, and do not let the AI modify those - maybe let it ask for feature requests.

With a normal power system made up of spinning generators and spinning steam turbines, you have a built-in "flywheel" effect that smooths out those surges, which gives you time to do things like back off the power a bit.

Solar and wind don't have that without spending a LOT of money for extra batteries and flywheel storage - which kills the economics of solar and wind.

as long as the topic is not controversial and political.

The problem is that the Wiki mods are VERY VERY biased. Not just a little. I have run into this personally just trying to make very simple edits. They would not accept simple facts that I had backup sources for.

This was just for movie credits for an actress that at some point had turned conservative...

So for anything political, Wikipide will be factually wrong, sometimes (or often) egregiously so.

But that's ok if it's only for political content right???

But there's the trouble you see. It affects what is political TO THEM in ways you cannot comprehend, so ANY page might be touched by the corruption of the Wikipedia moderator biases. I wouldn't think a simply actress filmography would be affected yet it was. No visitor other than that page would ever know it was inaccurate or incomplete.

So you can trust absolutely nothing from Wikipedia without extensive checking of what facts they refuse to list. Which makes the entire body of work garbage - I have not used it for years now.

Seems like the obvious choice.

A more interesting question I think is, does anyone own this AI actress?

That is to say - if a company took her likeness, and used other AI to make porn - could "her" agent sue them?

Or in other words, is a purely AI generated likeness even copyrightable, when technically no human made it?

I don't give a shit if some Russian/Kazakh/Malaysian bot farmer wants to take over my phone.

So you do no banking on your phone? Unlikely.

For the 99% of people that do in fact use a phone for banking, protection from lower level criminals is invaluable. For most people there is real financial loss possible from a phone being taken over, at the very least to monitor banking access mechanisms.

Richest man in the world, but 90%+ of the population has no freakin' idea who he is or why he's important.

Unless Trump was the one who personally built all these models that companies are trying to replace workers with, I don't think he's much of the reason there are so many more people out of work.

ChatGPT making up things and incorrectly following policy would merely be in line with the current editorial pool, who ignores policy when it suits them and fabricates material if an article has any kind of political content.

What everyone does not seem to realize, is that MNAY of the choices we are making to "save the climate" are equally stupid. They are just less obviously stupid.

It's going to be the biggest handwavium of the whole project, unless we discover a near-zero-energy way to bridge those light-years..

Having a wimpy direct path that just goes from Airport - Downtown - Convention center is perfect for a huge number of cities.

So many places it can be really rough to get from the airport to the downtown area any time around rush hour (which in a lot of cities is around a 3-4 hour window).

Some places with rail kind of have this - like the train that goes from Midway into Chicago. But even THAT has a lot of stops and is not great for travelers, even if it's nice for residents.

I also have to say that a system where you are riding in smaller vehicles I am a big fan of because it eliminates the problem where homeless people are just handing up on the train which create danger, nasty messes, and of course awful smells. Though awful smells is not restricted to the homeless of course, that can be any other passengers also so nice to be removed from them too.