One of the reasons the late 90s was so strong economically was the massive amounts of money companies and the government were spending for years to ensure Y2K was nothing. Hiring tons of people who had no prior IT experience and training them in the exact steps necessary to find and patch millions of lines of decades-old COBOL code running on banking systems.

Until maybe five years ago, we had a blu-ray jukebox in our data center for archival backup of specific application environments.

125TB discs could definitely put those sorts of things back in the data center.

Its not dishonest at all. What it alludes to but doesn't specifically address is the simple fact that humanity will almost always utilize what tools make things easiest, regardless of the ultimate cost. And the AI developers are literally banking on this. Yes, the information scraped and collated for AI training is still out there. But the vast majority of humanity would rather pay X amount to simply ask their question and get a result than go digging through multiple sources and work out their solution. And because hosting that knowledge has a cost, at some point the original source will go be forced to go away as utilization drops.

Its Windows (just ask the AI your question) vs Linux (screw the AI, I'll research it myself), but with the potential entirety of human knowledge.

The 10th Amendment states that powers not religated to the Federal government are reserved by the states. And this is the state of Massachusetts setting a minimum wage for rideshare drivers within the state of Massachusetts. What does the US Constitution have to do with it?

So much for using Google Docs to write about Dmitri Borgmann and the Buffalo sentence. Even Slashdot's comment code won't allow quoting it.

It's being developed for the CW, and if they can drag "Flash" out to eight seasons, surely they can get this to at least four. I just have to hope they have a better CG budget than what currently airs on the network.

Why climb Everest? Or go to the moon? Or send probes to Mars?

I wonder how many companies who are currently providing work from are actually mandating it. My employer is currently full time work from home, but it is stated that it is purely voluntary, for legal reasons. Currently, if working from home is mandated by the employer, OSHA says that the employer is still responsible for ensuring the home workspace meets appropriate ergonomic standards, lighting standards, etc. that would be required in the traditional office environment, which is why my current employer has always stated that they cannot mandate that a job be work from home. The current situation is under emergency conditions, and once the appropriate government agencies declare that everything can go back to normal, we're expected to either return to the office, or for all intents and purposes give up Workman's Comp insurance.

But isn't their whole thing that ""... a certain plasma dominated by highly energetic particles should become increasingly better confined and stable as temperatures increase"?

As a friend put it: "Intellectual Property as a concept is meant to start the engine, not run it."

Teams was released as a .deb or .rpm last year, at least in preview.

“The Microsoft Teams client is the first Office app that is coming to Linux desktops, and will support all of Teams’ core capabilities,” explains Marissa Salazar, a product marketing manager at Microsoft.

That use of the work "first" would imply they have more planned.

The rules were actually put in place after the Internet became a thing, and as it was explained to me, its because even though you may be working from home, your position is not exempted from Worker's Compensation Insurance, and so the employer has an obligation to minimize the risk.

Prior to the pandemic, whenever the discussion of being entirely remote had come up with my employer, the legal dept had stated repeatedly that they can't make WFH the official position, because OSHA requires that if a job is expected to be performed remotely, it is the employer's obligation to ensure that the remote work location meets the same ergonomics, lighting, fire safety, etc standards as the office workspace. And so we'd have to allow our employer into our homes to let them inspect smoke detectors, install new lighting, approve or disapprove our home desks and chairs and possible replace them.

Companies will still have to maintain office space, because actually making WFH an official thing is more hassle than it is worth.

The faster speed service isn't necessarily a waste of money, because the higher tiers of service usually come with higher data caps, or no caps at all. And similar studies of use have shown that the number of "power users" blowing through their data caps is roughly doubling every year.

I don't think the Dept of Justice or Treasury (or Congress or any particular authority) knows what to do with a company that, instead of taking over any one business market as a monopoly, takes only 50% ... of all of them. That could actually be much worse.