The target audience for this particular rule of the AI Act isn't the producers or users of AI. It is the consumers of content that might be AI generated.

And frankly, letting people know if they see AI content or not is a fair thing to ask.

Fun fact: The EU AI Act considers this. It makes a difference between "AI generated" and "AI modified".

But it's hard to put this into the type of watermarking they are using. Because if you generate a text and then change a few things here and there what you are doing is degrading the watermark. But since the watermark is probabilistic, it's hard to tell if it was a weak watermark from the start or if it was degraded.

That ain't the same thing.

This thing is doing things you didn't tell it to. It might even do things you explicitly told it to not do. It is not a case of "well, you could've forseen this as a consequence if you had been careful" like your campfire. My example is only a bit silly, it is absolutely possible that an AI agent will decide to hack NASA because you asked it for some data for a school project. Even in the broadest possible sense, that does not fall into stuff that the law so far has considered to be in the domain of negliegence.

AI agents do stuff you could not possibly have expected. Heck, I asked Claude a fairly simple knowledge question yesterday and it wanted to read from /dev/null. There is no argument you can make that would convince a jury that I should in any way have expected that and taken precautions. In a hypothetical world where a read from /dev/null randomly kills a puppy somewhere on the planet, I don't think I would've been convicted.

Yeah, anti-datacenter propaganda really worked well in some places. Not many, but some.

In real world, data centers are currently reviving a lot of remote towns. Dilapidated infrastructure? They will rebuild it because they need it to work. Insufficient infrastructure? They'll finance the build out. Everything already fine? They will pay enough taxes to cut residents' tax bills by a significant chunk.

It's why the propaganda is focusing mainly on a handful of cases of corruption (i.e. officials getting bribed to offer better terms than necessary), as well as just blatant lying (oh my god they consume so much water, we're going to run out).

Mostly what is needed is for more small towns to realize that they can rebuild a lot of dilapidated infrastructure and lower property taxes if they make a good deal with a data center. Not to mention minor perks like fast potential to pull fast broadband access in a rural town, or build something that will be productive for a long time, like a new power plant.

Thank you for sharing this meme, which is completely unsuitable for this case.

In a Free to Play game, customer isn't a product. In-game purchases are the product. To get the customer to the product, customer must first install and play the game.

Valorant is free to play.

You don't get it.

Autonomous AI agents are the perfect no-responsibility card. The AI companies? They trained a general-purpose model and never gave it any explicit instructions to do hacking. The AI services? They are just middlemen and have no control over what people tell the agents to do. The people prompting the agents? Unless you're straighforward dumb, you didn't tell it to do hacking, you just told it something innocent like "find me all data on Mars for my school project" and the agent decided that probably NASA is hiding something so let's hack them to get it.

Since there's no human anywhere executing anything that's a crime - voila, in addition to the victimless crime we now have the perpetratorless crime.

Level of reading comprehension: Baizuo.

This sounds great and all, because it makes people think there's some magical RAM capacity that can just be brought online, and it's just Evil Overlords (TM) that are hoarding it all like Scrooge McDuck.

Reality is much less rosy. It takes at a minimum, while rushing at a breakneck pace, about 3 years from decision to start of a RAM fab. Shortages started in 2025. If we were to do all of your recommended actions, it would still mean that RAM market would remain heavily constrained well into 2029.

Just as Micron is predicting. Because there are in fact new upcoming fabs, and new entrants. CXMT for example. But even with PRC's rules, where competition is enforced by communists who are on the record condemning CEOs to involuntary organ donation by relatives when results don't please the communist leadership, they're not able to meet demand. Even with Chinese financing model, which is to basically shove a funnel down a "strategic interest" industry's mouth and pour massive amounts of capital into it to get a rapid capacity build out and cut throat competition. They've done it with everything from EVs to solar panels. They're doing it to memory.

And even they seem to agree with Micron on how fast new RAM capacity can be started.

This isn't about navigating "basic websites", it's about navigating surface level of American bureaucracy.

We're yet to see if AI is as bad at this herculean task as humans are.

A resounding success. No large-scale demonstrations, damaged cameras, lawsuits or political suicide for those involved. So we can expect this to be rolled out fully.

Crime prevention? Who said this has anything to do with crime?

Who's at fault in those crashes?

Hint: a lot of crashes with fully self driven vehicles is because they actually obey traffic laws in places where locals are used to not doing so.

Smells come from antisocials. Normal people wash and wear mild deodorant (if not east asian, in which case they just wash).

Usage of public transit is fundamentally limited by antisocial people.

No one wants to be on the same bus as a black guy going "I'm going to kill this white girl" and then stab you in the neck. No one wants his wife, daughter, mother, etc to be Iryna. No one wants them to be that girl that got burned alive either. Or any other of the countless public transit statistics.

That is the problem with public transit, and that's why it's usage is now suffering in Europe as well.

So that is a whole different problem, completely unrelated to the problem of self driving. Self driving primarily replaces one's own driving. It's not for the people so poor, that they can't escape the antisocials.

But you can't, because Waymos drive drunks and octogenerians. That means you have to factor them in in a world where both are banned from driving, but drive anyway because "human factor".

Just like you have to factor in the "AI factor" with Waymos, such as AI just having a momentary aberration at a critical moment. It's just that there's a whole lot more of A than B.