Not true. No user tracks on road means they must be empty. This is a recurring problem with Google's algorithm. If the roads are closed due a non-official reason, but emergency responders block access *to* the road (e.g. by blocking highway onramps) then Google attempts to direct people down said highway - algorithm says traffic is lighter than usual.

Road closures are usually sourced through official channels (or at least third parties that got them through other official channels). They aren't auto-generated like a lot of information. This is actually a problem for Google when a road is freshly closed. I still remember driving through Germany one day and Google was doing its best to navigate me onto a highway that was closed due to a sudden urgent issue (think it may have been a flood). The problem is the police closed the highway onramps which meant that Google just saw an empty highway and thus decided that was the fastest way to travel and attempting to avoid the onramp just resulted in being rerouted to the next closed onramp. It took half an hour or so before Google acknowledge that the highway was closed.

But lately something is more amiss. I constantly see a local construction site listing a highway as closed when it is in fact open, and some times Google navigates the path correctly but gives a notification that the road "may be closed" and to check before you depart. I've never come accorss that before this year.

You disabled systems for a CVE that relies on an attacker to already have privileged access to your system? I think it's time you go check the expiry date on all your prepped cans in your disaster bunker.

It's not clear to everyone. This suffers the same problem as literally everything in tech: most people don't have a clue how it works or what its limits are. Even with all the news out there this will actually still fool a significant portion of the population.

It likely wasn't since it employed people. It probably is now.

I'm not surprised. American gardens seem to be about putting down a perfectly flat layer of green grass and hoping for the love of God, Christ and everything that is holy that not a single element of colour or varying plant matter is seen. Oh and then a leaf falls and you run off in a panic, hit the big red button, the klaxons ring and you get a leaf blower out to make sure that demon plant based hellspawn is ejected from your property.

In much of the rest of the world gardening is a thing. Shit man paper based magazines for gardening still exist too, they seem to have outlived everything else.

Yes, but it's already hard to convince legislators and the general public of the necessity. People still cling to the "I have nothing to hide" mentality (which may be true, but they have plenty worth protecting).
But once personal data becomes an economic asset with the ability to earn a little with it, convincing people to value their privacy will be even harder. And legislators will use a monetization scheme as an excuse to loosen up privacy laws.

AI does a fair job at voice acting and graphic design already, in a few areas, or those people wouldn't be losing their jobs. And a positive effect is that it makes those services available to people / teams for whom it used to be too expensive, like hobbyists and indie developers or creators.

There's nothing ironic here. The text was written from a senior business writer, not a talking head. Reading a teleprompter or repeating a talking point is trivial to replace. But actually coming up with an opinion through creative thought (like the article in this case) is not something AI will be able to do in any foreseeable future.

Not everything about CNN is reduced to talking heads. You don't need to switch off your brain every time you see those three letters. If you do, you may actually be rife for replacing with AI. God knows your post here showed no actual thought.

If alcohol makes you pass out you may have a problem. But for a more serious answer: Yes, some flights no longer serve any alcohol (usually because people got drunk and started fights) and budget airlines will charge you a fortune for it.

Tried that but apt was not found on my system. This command worked: winget install --id=Microsoft.Edit

No this discussion is about the cost vs pleasure of flying. The experience for customers hasn't gone backwards in any way. You just don't want to pay the same you did for the past experience so you *voluntarily* of your own accord choose to pay less for a worse experience.

Pay the same you did in the past inflation adjusted and you actually get a better experience now than in the past.

You're right it has nothing to do with first / business class. It has to do with people not paying for something and then complaining about them not getting it.

How do I know that opinion is yours and wasn't generated by AI? How do you know my question here wasn't AI? You may not "want" it, but the source of information (or rather the brokerage of it, since AI may be paraphrasing an actual legit source) is rarely if ever known to you. This isn't your decision to make.

You're confusing a product with its use. You don't gather anything by having AI integrated with something. I agree AI in search is a really bad idea, but ... honestly you could benefit from using AI because your analogy you came up with on your own is just absolutely rubbish.

Indeed, but Instagram is built largely for not just sharing photos taken on a phone, but sharing photos that are taken in the app. It really doesn't matter what you set your camera on your phone to. The vast majority of content is either taken through the app, or prepared specifically for the app and it's aspect ratio.

By the way even the highest end cameras have options to customised the aspect ratio recorded. There's no rule saying you need to use every pixel, to say nothing of the fact that there are plenty prosumer model cameras in 4/3rs or micro 4/3s which do in fact have a 3:4 aspect ratio.