Are we, as a sapient species facing an uncertain prospect of continuence in a world full of rapidly-advancing bullshit going to learn from this catastrophic and absurdly predictable failure of information security, personal and professional ethics, civilian government, market economics, basic common sense, and consumer psychology?

Eight-Ball-Based-On-Cursory-Reading-Of-Literally-Any-Slice-of-Human-History says "no".

What do you say, and why is it also "no"?

Hey here is a simple idea... Why not do a toll? You know something simple that they do with trucks. For what I hate about this tax is what happens when you are outside of the country?

I hate crap like this, and this is my explanation.

Large companies are not innovative, large companies suck little companies dry. Compare the dot com bubble with the AI bubble. In the dot com bubble we had thousands of small companies riding the wave. Of course a very large chunk of them went under. In the AI bubble we have a few big companies and that's it. How is that better for innovation? The only really new company is Open AI. Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Facebook are all borg companies where innovation goes to die.

Steve Jobs was never afraid to kill off cash cows if something more innovative comes along. The companies I mentioned are not willing. Chinese companies have figured out how to run these models on less hardware. Yet American companies keep talking billions upon billions. They do so so that no little company would ever challenge them.

Take for example Musk and Optimus vs Unitree Robots. Unitree has a video where it shows a robot that can be knocked down and it gets up without problems. Musk to counter shows a robot with power lines that can do a simple kata. GIVE ME A BREAK! This is the best American engineering can do?

So to critique European innovation is yet another tactic by American "innovation" companies to try and make things go their way. BTW what the article fails to mention is that labor costs quite a bit more in America, than Europe. I am talking about high tech labor.

Exactly. No idea why people confuse this.

Not really. They all demand certain hooks that will give up your identity. For if they allowed truly anonymous behaviour I could visit twitter without an account. Try visiting and seeing content on Facebook or Twitter without an account. Reddit will allow it for the most part, but Instagram nags you. The others just say log in to see this content.

DUDE you nailed it! If social media really cared they would have done this already. But they realize it will lead to less clicks, less addictions.

How less addictions? Because kids will have to find other means to amuse themselves. You know like maybe going outside? Doing sports? Having a hobby? There have been quite a few studies that have indicated social media at such a young age is not good for the development of the mind. Once you are older it is less problematic.

No this is not a government issued license to allow you to speak. Children can continue to speak. They can continue to interact on the Internet. However... people drive at either 16 or 18. People are considered adults at 18. People can legally drink from 16 to 21 depending on the country. The list goes on there are plenty of restrictions and they make sense. Free speech is not absolute. Otherwise if you really believe it you would not be a paranoid anonymous coward. You would put your money where your mouth is.

I don't necessarily disagree with where you're going here, but can you elaborate on this:

I've worked at government contractors that had real air-gaps for things like their databases, but that does not seem to be the norm for the rest of the world. How would ordinary businesses make use of their databases if they are not network accessible under any circumstances, printed reports? Some sort of unidirectional transmission? What sort of data ingress are they using?

I ask this because I have been involved in the transfer of data in highly regulated, air-gapped systems, and they are incredibly expensive. Are you really indicating that true air-gap databases will be ubiquitous (or at least commonplace) in the forseeable future?

Why are you classified as a troll? You asked the right question. When I read the headline;

"Adjusting for this bias revealed that the summer of 2023 was about 2.3 C above pre-industrial temperatures from this period. "

I read BS. Let me explain it this way. Imagine you do statistical sampling. It relies on the fact that data follows a Gaussian curve. The problem is that if your data is incomplete, LIKE SAID IN THE ARTICLE, then you can't do statistical adjustment. Of course it has not stopped the statisticians making things up, but it still does not make it right.

What makes this bias adjustment worse is that we are considered to have a completely out of whack value. Since we are not following the gaussian curve since we are out of whack it means the data is useless.

UNLESS and here is where it bugs me to no end, we want to make the assertion that climate change is out of control and a statistical outlier. Guess which one folks are following. Yeah... This is why I am skeptical, and why it surprises me that you are marked as a troll.

It's a cool idea and they stand for a lot of great ideals, but laptops are incredibly hard to get right, drivers are hard to get right, and they are a small team trying to support a large number of possible configurations. Hardware gets more complicated by the year: forget the CPU and various GPUs, just look at how many other devices in a modern computer have a full-on processor, e.g. fancy touchbars, displays, even hard drives! Hell, your CPU probably has its own secondary general-purpose processors for things like security, and our CPUs themselves get firmware updates now to change how their instructions function. They are doing great work, but the deck is so stacked against them that it's not funny.

But here is the problem even as a first pass it is bad as a first pass. Let's do a first pass and I get somebody who has rigged the paper to pass through the system. If we see a B or even an A and assume the system assignment is correct then we have a false negative. Thus if this happens often enough what then? How can you trust a system that has that? You have to read each and every one of the papers, which puts us right back in square one.

Most space launch companies are inefficient and ineffective. SpaceX has the margin to pay these taxes, those unfortunates don't. If you want to kill competition in an industry, tax it enough that only the large corporations can survive the loss, and add some complicated regulations in for extra effect. No one else has anything close to what Starship may become, and further reduction in margins will ensure that SpaceX will have a defacto monopoly on non-military space launches while their competitors are strangled paying for FAA services that is disproportionately benefit owners of private jets and charter flights for the rich.

It is very much a monopoly issue. Think of it as follows. You have a company that controls the platform. Then they create a media platform where Apple is a preferred media player. After all trying to get Apple TV working well on non Apple devices is a non-starter. It is kinda there, but it is really is just there for show. Now with one of these shows they create is something that could be considered as comedy journalism.

Thus comes the question are they allowed to use their platform which dominates as a censor? The natural answer seems to be yes they can do what they want. HOWEVER they have a monopoly and thus the rules change. Thus the question from the government is, what were the conditions of this cancellation? Maybe it is abusive power, maybe not, but you don't know until you ask questions.

You don't get to come back a year (or a century) later and say, "Hey, I just found out what that painting is actually worth. Give it back."

Actually... Why not? You said yourself you're in the wrong and you certainly acted in bad faith, so why shouldn't your victim have their demand to annul the deal enforced?

As opposed to people with nativist and inward looking views, companies like Apple HAVE to work overseas, and if you keep following the US govt kool-aid, then you will only be able to do business with Western Europe and other allies.

Try to understand that a big part of the world actually sees the US as the big bad empire that they portray China to be and it makes sense that they ask Stewart to tone it down a bit.

It's not that China is a big bad empire, it's that Xi is an emperor who's unable to placate his people with promises of a better tomorrow due to China's economy having caught up enough that the rubber band has gone slack and dictatorships being inherently incompatible with the rule of law which a strong economy requires, so his only hope for survival is to placate them with promises of glory which makes a confrontation with China and West pretty much inevitable, and Xi knows that. It's the same deal as with Russia, US is simply being wiser than EU was.

Basically, what's business to Apple is a weapon to China, and China is a fundamentally hostile nation to anyone who doesn't think Xi would make a great world leader, which he wouldn't judging by everything I know about life in China and also because he's a genocidal tyrant. That's not "nativist" or "inward looking", that's simply realism.

I recently saw a very insightful interview where dictatorships are defined by things you cannot criticize, like the CCP in China, Kim Jong-un in Korea, etc. In the US the thing that will absolutely get you canceled will be talking about the Israeli lobby and the influence such a small group holds over US culture in general.

Seriously? You're equating getting canceled with getting disappeared?