Wasn't AI meant to make things cheaper because you didn't hire those pesky humans?

Can't they use AI to drive their prices down?

Or perhaps its just a big scam to shove an unwanted feature down our throat.

You are right problem is you need the knowledge first in order to check the AI my fear is that they make students lean using AI before they have learnt how to do it themselves. Kind of like you should teach people to add before you give them a calculator, but worse because that calculator can get it very wrong.

But the lowest denominator will win, management will use dumb metrics and go with the latest fad. Then pat themselves of the back for being up with the times. I have seen it this too many times to think it won't happen.

I don't have rights to my code, and nor should I, most code I have written is based on a lot of work done by other people, why would it be ethical to deny other people learn from my code?

I never understood this, why not? What if there where no options that you liked well enough to vote for? The people who voted for trump should have less right to complain shouldn't they? If there was an option to say, I don't like any of you and if that becomes the majority then you have remove those candidates and try again. Even if it doesn't do anything but takes politicians down a peg showing them that most people don't want then to rule the country them it might be a good thing.

While I have always voted, not once have I voted for a person I truly agree with on most issues, its just I kind of disagree less with them than the other party.

What about people with no smart phones? If I wanted visit (which I don't) sure I would be quite happy to leave my phone lying on the desk, how would that track me at all, maybe it has a motion sensor in that case I can just give it so someone else to walk round with. Honestly I think this just a way to track innocent people anyone who wants to commit a crime will get around this.

Of course you can, you just ask them what they mean, sure each person is different and it may include multiple things.

Your problem is you think they a fascists and probably call or imply such. The moment you start insulting people is the moment you lose the argument, they will not listen. Most people are not fascists they simply disagree with you on the solution. For example I think the actual divide between trump vs non trump supporters (I assume that is what you are referring to) is actually quite small, they both see the world going to ruin, they both see the corruption that is happening. The main difference is what they think the solution should be. Most people just want a better world, to live their lives, and have their descendants have good lives too, but we have become so angry with each other that both sides have stopped listening to each other. Make a true effort to understand them without going in with the preconception that they are evil, or stupid in some way, be willing to let them convince you then might convince them. Of course this takes time and also social media removes a lot of the queues of face to face interaction, so that any minor statement can be blown out of all proportion, and we can also cherry pick the worst of the worst statements.

Well if you read it from a point of view they are not just trying to train cheap workers.

Isn't the point of AI at least LLMs so it can understand humans, why would you need to train people to use AI?

Now if you want to train everyone to be able to create AI then sure you need training, but why on earth would you need that in a society?

This maybe but the AI summary is not, I want an option saying I don't trust it so stop making me skip over it (and the ads) every search.

Isn't code law? /sarcasm

weren't there 4? "how many rs are in strawberry"

Not sure laptop usage has changed especially in low end laptops, they are basically can just run a web browser. ChromeOS has proven that you can sell laptops without windows. Will this succeed? I don't know but it is possible.

In what practical sense do you see an individual being able to do the same under the law against nintendo's lawyers if the situation was reversed?

Sure they have the right under the law to do so, however the law is broken.

I actually think a certain level of unfairness is actually necessary. It is not the child's fault that their parents can't afford an education, split up, etc. However if we don't reward the children good parents you remove the evolutionary drive for people to do so. Some inequality is necessary in the system. However the problem comes where that level of inequality become effectively insurmountable. At that point you start removing to many intelligent people.