Comment Re: Enough Already (Score 1) 119
No one is getting fired for doing what Altman told them to do. These failures aren't legit, they are theater to justify regulations
Comment Re:This is Gavin Newsom's Fault (Score 1) 114
I know you're being flippant, but I'm referring to California's attorney general (who had been VERY vocal about pursuing this
He capitulated after fighting hard and people were like "why would you do that?" Answer: BECAUSE GAVIN NEWSOM MADE HIM.
Comment This is Gavin Newsom's Fault (Score 1) 114
The CA attorney general buckled because of pressure from Gavin Newsom (who is worried that falling employment levels in CA might damage his run for president in a few years).
Again GAVIN NEWSOM is to blame. When he runs for president in a few years, remember it was GAVIN NEWSOM who betrayed America and forced his attorney general to let the Paramount deal through. GAVIN NEWSOME.
Submission + - Minitap on how Google stole their code and attributions (minitap.ai)
Submission + - The 'Anti-AI' Panic Is Led by...AI Companies (hotair.com)
schwit1 writes: What we are seeing is a massive, pretty obviously coordinated campaign by AI researchers, companies, NGOs, and politicians to strangle competition in an industry and, as I will show, save the financial bacon of the top AI companies that are vastly overextended financially because they have made contractual commitments that they simply have no prospect of paying for.
Comment Re:Translation: (Score 1) 94
They've NEVER profited off anything they've ever done. Open AI and the other frontier AI companies operate at a (INCREDIBLY HUGE) deficit!
Their entire business model requires them to grow by like 20x AND lower their costs to 1/20th where they are now (or something like that, not those exact numbers). If they can't do that, they literally will not be able to pay their bills in a few years.
It's a house of cards predicated on the assumption one company will dominate a huge new market AND get their costs way down, and THEN they will make huge profits for years on that market. If that doesn't happen, the subprime mess will look like child's play compared to what happens to the frontier companies (and likely the rest of the economy with them).
Comment Re:They blocked it. (Score 1) 50
This was a terrible comment, and it absolutely deserved to be down-voted into oblivion
Comment Re:It was just ordinary research... (Score 1) 50
It absolutely can
- 30% of the time you'll get a simple correct answer
- 30% of the time you'll get a 10-page dissertation of the answer
- 30% of the time you'll get either a dissertation or one line
- 10% of the time it will answer "they were talking shit" with no further explanation.
Comment Re:Automattic and WP Engine now have the same prob (Score 4, Interesting) 38
It's not quite *that* simple.
In OSS, *anyone* can fork the code. If it was as simple as "the original creator is doing stupid/terrible things", everyone involved could fork and start contributing to the fork (anyone ever hear of a little database called MySQL
But this isn't just about OSS code, it's about the corporation. It's that corporation that is the root of the entire problem.
Comment Re:Two wrongs (Score 1) 38
I know A LOT about what's wrong with Matt. I have heard absolutely nothing about what is wrong with the board (other than the fact that they left Matt in charge all these years).
Care you enlighten me?
Comment Re:These companies need to bring charges (Score 1) 125
Why is everyone pretending like corporations and AIs are somehow legally shielded? I'm no lawyer, but in the eyes of the law I'm pretty certain a crime is a crime.
It doesn't matter if ACME corp told you to do it or not: if you murder someone (and get caught), you are going to jail
(Now of course we have entire sections of laws just for dealing with corporations: I'm not talking about that. I'm talking above crimes that violate people's rights. If you break into someone's home, assault them, steal from them, murder them, etc. our legal system holds the human(s) involved responsible. Period.)
Submission + - Journalist Calls Out 'Collective Amnesia' of Schools' Romance with Big Tech 2
theodp writes: The74 reports that in her new book, Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools ("the inside story of how Big Tech catalyzed, co-opted, and ultimately came to capture computer science and AI education in America"), Natasha Singer, a veteran business reporter for The New York Times, traces Big Tech's bid to persuade schools to embrace their products, with industry-sponsored curricula and tools growing at astonishing speed.
In his book review of Coding Kids , Aran Shetterly begins with a Spoiler Alert: "Turns out, Silicon Valley isn’t especially altruistic." He writes, "At the center of her book is the story of the nonprofit Code.org and its charismatic, Harvard-educated leader, Hadi Partovi. Thirteen years ago, Partovi produced a five-minute video called “What Most Schools Don’t Teach.” This 'audacious act of Silicon Valley influencer marketing...aimed...at a low-resourced nonprofit sector: public schools serving millions of children,' delivered a worrying message: Kids who didn’t learn to write code would be left behind. And the long-term success of the United States economy depended on training these students to fill a million open tech jobs. [...] No word in Coding Kids chills more than 'democratize.' 'Democratizing' sounds a lot like 'democracy,' but the tech-elite byword has nothing to do with a form of government; from the lips of the tech barons, it means enforcing ubiquitous access to their products."
Fast-forward to 2026, and now we're dealing with AI, and tech is reading from a similar playbook. Asked by The74's Greg Toppo, "Does this moment seem different to you?", Singer replies, "This moment is different, but also similar. We are in a moment in society where a lot of people have increased distrust of these huge tech companies, and we see a wave of parents pushing back against tech in schools. [...] We have had these cycles of tech in schools where there are all these promises about the latest tech, laptops, learning apps, massive open online courses, virtual reality, big data's going to revolutionize schools and like democratize access to education for kids and get them these great career skills, and we keep having these cycles. My concern is that we don't learn anything. One of the reasons I wrote this book is because it feels like we have collective amnesia. Now we're in the sixth or eighth cycle of this — and shouldn't we be asking questions about the push for AI in schools, based on what we've learned about the push for all the other things that came before?"
In his book review of Coding Kids , Aran Shetterly begins with a Spoiler Alert: "Turns out, Silicon Valley isn’t especially altruistic." He writes, "At the center of her book is the story of the nonprofit Code.org and its charismatic, Harvard-educated leader, Hadi Partovi. Thirteen years ago, Partovi produced a five-minute video called “What Most Schools Don’t Teach.” This 'audacious act of Silicon Valley influencer marketing...aimed...at a low-resourced nonprofit sector: public schools serving millions of children,' delivered a worrying message: Kids who didn’t learn to write code would be left behind. And the long-term success of the United States economy depended on training these students to fill a million open tech jobs. [...] No word in Coding Kids chills more than 'democratize.' 'Democratizing' sounds a lot like 'democracy,' but the tech-elite byword has nothing to do with a form of government; from the lips of the tech barons, it means enforcing ubiquitous access to their products."
Fast-forward to 2026, and now we're dealing with AI, and tech is reading from a similar playbook. Asked by The74's Greg Toppo, "Does this moment seem different to you?", Singer replies, "This moment is different, but also similar. We are in a moment in society where a lot of people have increased distrust of these huge tech companies, and we see a wave of parents pushing back against tech in schools. [...] We have had these cycles of tech in schools where there are all these promises about the latest tech, laptops, learning apps, massive open online courses, virtual reality, big data's going to revolutionize schools and like democratize access to education for kids and get them these great career skills, and we keep having these cycles. My concern is that we don't learn anything. One of the reasons I wrote this book is because it feels like we have collective amnesia. Now we're in the sixth or eighth cycle of this — and shouldn't we be asking questions about the push for AI in schools, based on what we've learned about the push for all the other things that came before?"
Comment Re:Where's The Price War? (Score 2) 17
If you use a provider like OpenRouter you can use any AI on a per-token basis. You can even switch from one to the other with the press of a button (almost).
FWIW, I still pay for a $20/month Claude subscription
Comment Re:Water is wet (Score 1, Insightful) 160
Yes.
Your TV sucks up like 20-25% of its power consumption even when its turned off. Before I even got this TV, I used a device between the TV and the wall, to I turn it off when I'm not using the TV (easy with a smart speaker).
When I am using the TV I use a separate device (Chromecast), not the TV itself, so they can't spy on me through the TV itself. Also, the TV lacks Internet.
Tell me again why getting a cheap TV was a bad thing.
Comment Re:...what part of BlueSky isn't 100% MIT licensed (Score 1) 38
You all are way overthiniking this. FSF is Stallman's organization. Stallman is an extremist by anyone's objective measurement.
Virtually no software, even most OSS software, conforms to Stallman's demands, and his organization tries to push licenses that virtually no one can adopt in practice.
He was once relevant in the free software movement, but now he's just a crazed voice howling into the wind about how everything isn't free enough. Don't try to ascribe sense or logic to him.
