This is a shill using the moment to scrap a regulation they don't like.

The solution to the annoyance of banners is making mandatory the presence of a "no consent" button, and making it the default choice if the user does not act. The banner should also not be shown more than once per session, so you don't have those popups repeatedly trying you to reverse your "no" decision.

And then, make ad-blocker-excluding websites illegal, and mandate the banners to accept the ad-blocker saying "no consent" automatically.

No, because this site is dead.

It's corpse still festers with the slime of trolls, parasites, incels and MAGA. Those do not understand C, or even the interest of obfuscated code.

This is a stupid take, so stupid even the current US education system contradicts it. Is primary and secondary education "rationed" around you? No. Every child gets it, and is mandated to attend it. There are enough schools for everyone, because the government is mandated to provide them.

And then, in civilized countries university is free or almost-free in the beer sense. The only programs that have limited space are the ones where the available jobs are few (like art conservators), or the academic requirements are high (like medicine). Any person can enter, as long as they have the prerequisite knowledge.

As for the "decided by 14" bit, you are also completely wrong. There is no entrance age limit, even for very hard to get courses. So if at the first occasion (around 17 or 18) you do not make the cut, you can try again later. Some go into a related program, work hard, get the high marks, then get back in their preferred program. This diversion is also good for society in two ways: some discover that they love the related stuff, and the ones that get back to their first choice are better-rounded professionals.

Oh but that ship has long sailed away for Google. Google does a lot apart from search like television (YouTube) and advertising.

Worse: Google search results are heavily edited by Google for their own purposes - advertising and paid results. In fact, since before the pandemic one of the best ways to not find something has been to use the goog.

So they have no leg to stand on when they say "when people search they want to find relevant info and we relentlessly work to give them only that!"

Nice strawman, but no.

Preparing for a hiccup - say a few days or weeks - is feasible and useful. Great for storms and other events that happen everywhere all the time.

What is impossible is what preppers sell: permanent total self-sufficiency.

Whatever you go get at the store got there by ICE truck. Your seed and fertilizer came to you the same way.

Your tires are made of fuel and have a shelf life of a decade at most before they dry rot.

Your heat pump is filled with a hydrocarbon refrigerant, maybe even straight propane (R-290, HC-12a or HC-22a), which you won't be able to refill without a petrochemical plant.

Your solar installation probably shuts down if the power lines go dead, and is probably not powerful enough to charge your car, heat the house and power your fridge and hot water at the same time, because it's not economical to do so.

Don't misunderstand: you having made those investments is fantastic, but it does not make you self-sufficient, just at best net-zero energy wise.

You cannot prep for the end of civilization, period. It's not possible. IRL the breakdown of society does not look like "mad Max", it looks like some dumb ass with no fuel, no electricity and quickly disappearing or rotting stocks.

Piling enough food for one person for a year is already a stupid proposition, imagine a decade and then two or three, for all of your extended family. Even if you had the land and manual tools, being a subsistence farmer is a profession the you are not trained or physically fit enough for. And then your have to upkeep whatever you have at the start for a few decades by repairing, rebuilding and replacing what is worn down.

Stop waiting for the collapse and start correcting what we already have to avert it.

I hate you because you're probably right.

Great news!
You can get an EV for a lot less than 25k$, slightly used. You can go full contact and buy Hertz's overstock, or go in the world and buy a regular used EV of most brands for that budget.

No they are not.

CNNs combined with other neural net forms are good at those tasks.

LLMs are LANGUAGE models, and are related to structures that are good at transforming language: translation, summarization, etc.

But media hype and LLM bros decided that any AI or algorithmic technique should be replaced by their bullshit generators.

"I have a hammer to sell, so everything should be solved by hitting stuff."

Maybe so, but sensors for temp and humidity are available. In fact, you could plaster those and ambient pressure sensors along the control surfaces for a super-localized sense of the real drag and lift on them.

Computer systems can process many more senses that are butt-seat sensed by humans.

Amen to that! I just bought and Tesla was not even in consideration for the same reason.

There is a lot of choice nowadays between the Korean "just a car with an optional drivetrain", the stealth luxury cars and the me-too spaceships. And the pickups. Can't not have pickups.

Not considering Tesla did not feel like a limitation. Bad news for Space Karen.

Of course! that advertiser indifference to content explains why Truth is overloaded with advertiser money right now. /s

You clearly know nothing about law. This is not a criminal case, it's a civil suit. The standard is not "proof beyond reasonable doubt" but "preponderance of evidence"

In this case, the evidence is compelling: they tried hiring her, she said no, they went and faked her voice anyway, they advertised her involvement in a roundabout but transparent way and tried last minute to get her on board.

They will get shredded and she will get a big chunk of capital. The jury will see the bad faith and make the punishment stratospheric.

You seem to think of law as dumb, inflexible and static, just like code is. It is not.

That's why there are courts: to rule on corner cases like "if I make a machine sounding just like someone in particular, is it the same as using their likeness?" And "can I do anything I want with someone's likeness?". And then "is it free speech for me to make that likeness say or do things that person does not want to?". And "am I causing damages to the person by doing this?"

These questions are critical for people earning a living from their likeness or are public people. If I deepfake your face and voice supporting Mother Russia or Nazis or the rape of a colleague of yours, I am pretty sure you will not like the consequences. This is why these actors will fight this until the end, not "feelings". And we can be sure that courts will set limits in the process.