The difference is that if you pay people to monkey around with things, you get a non-revocable perpetual license to the result. With license rental, you get a perpetual bill. It's the same rent trap as individuals get stuck in but with less excuses.

Yes, and the reason is that they stupidly painted themselves into a corner and never thought about an exit strategy. Had they been thinking about the possibility that they might one day need to migrate from the beginning, it would be much cheaper to do so now.

That's the thing about painting yourself into a corner, a little better planning at the start can always avoid it with little to no additional effort.

And what makes you believe the Executive is not behind this?

Indeed, it stinks.

I literally do.

Talking about fooling, just wait till Trump and Kennedy hear about this!

Yep, a good 6 million Danes are alive.
Maybe they can add a good 50.000 from Greenland but that's it, the rest are dead.
Presently I'm in Denmark and the Danes have a great trust in their government, now they suddenly realize their borders don't stop this kind of shit.
A few years ago the GF needed a type of sleeping pill which her job was not allowing, the doctor just booked it on the CPR number of her deceased mother...

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.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again for those who arrived lete: If you give an AI agency of any kind, imagine everything you ask of it to be appended with "by any means necessary", because that' how it will interpret it. Slander, doxxing, and murder will definitely NOT be off the table even if you explicitly forbid them. That's the problem.

Honestly it should be called string toolbag. It contains some math that might (or might not) one day be useful in constructing a theory but it honestly has never actually been predictive enough to call it a theory.

A little of each. Banks in the U.S. actually maximized inconvenience by being closed any time most people actually had a decent opportunity to go to the bank, but it worked out somehow.

We already have string theory for that:-)

While the line of reasoning is sound, it's more or less a non-theory of exclusion.

Every player uses a mouse.

Oh, now you are trying to nitpick?

You are the one who said, "Censorship means suppression of speech or expression by a governing authority." which is a really dumb thing to say, otherwise "government censorship" or "self-censorship" wouldn't be terms.