dryadin

Never used LTSC myself but I understand it is not the best choice for most users: fewer updates, limited hardware support.

There's "debloat" in the product name.

Thin padding? Removable padding? Squishable padding? (Is that a word?) I assume that filing the edge leaves an ugly gap when closing the lid, so that is not ideal either.

Interesting piece. If copyright protection for code is weakened, other forms of legal protection may fill the gap. Trade secrets, for example. It is also worth noting that copyright protection for code is already significantly thinner than copyright protection for other creative works. AI may eliminate it. If this is the death of code copyright, it is not necessarily a bad thing. It could be a return to the free software ideals of the 1990s. Well, at least in some ways.

Nice initiative but I would personally prefer adding some kind of padding, which is an easier solution to the problem, not as drastic, reversible, and less controversial. Unless doing something controversial is one of the goals here, which is also fair.

If the court buys the argument that model weights are protected speech, this is a big deal. It turns the First Amendment into a shield against the application of any kind of consumer protection or anti-discrimination law to AI models. Could even apply to other forms of liability. This is just a claim right now and it is not the Supreme Court, but it may get there.

"If Colorado’s exemption succeeds, expect copycat bills nationwide."

In cases of AI-assisted plagiarism and similar issues, the interesting question is who is responsible, not in the legal sense, but in the broader context. Saying that it is all the author's fault is selling it short. What about the NYT editors? the AI model and its designers? The Guardian, if it allowed/sold its content for LLM training?

Just a quick note to say that it is not AI slop. That particular line is out of my PhD dissertation about the legal implications of VR, submitted over a decade ago. I'll take it as a compliment though, assuming you meant the piece is well researched.