variant

Instead, Europe will add more regulation, suffocating its ability to replace technology with its own.

We prefer cars. It's fine.

I can't access it via my Gopher client.

Doubtful, but if it isn't authorized by statute, a law should be passed not regulation.

50? The horror.

Salesforce Einstein is built on top of OpenAI. Given that they're a big competitor of Microsoft's, not sure how easy it will be for them to pivot to Azure OpenAI should OpenAI vaporize.

Musk is simply pointing out that many Western Jews keep strange bedfellows - a fair number of whom support the outright destruction of their homeland.

It's only being labeled antisemitic because Musk has been on the "outs" due to his recent politics (supporting free speech / transparency, being against lockdowns/mandates, advocacy for election integrity, etc.).

Absolutely. What customer wants to stick around if all that is left is the board?

Good for Reddit.

These mods think Reddit exists for them. Replace 'em all.

Reddit blackout has crumbled. Turns out mods are easily replaceable and the rest of us didn't give a hoot about their third party apps.

Carry on.

My sense is these rules are focused on biometric based tools, specifically those in "high risk" systems as classified by the law.

I think this has less intersection with sentiment detection tools that generate telemetry to help with support escalation use cases, etc.

Other opinions?

No issue with this. Subreddits exists for the users, not the moderators - all of which can be replaced.

There will be plenty. Guaranteed.

I've found replacement subs for those that went dark, which I expect will be back eventually.

What does success look like in the climate change fight? Is there a point where victory can ever be declared? Is that a "correct" temperature (what is it) or a CO2 PPM number (what's ideal)? When industry and scientists stop lobbying for money to fight it?

Are you aware of any sane takes like this you have links to? Even some of the skeptical articles like the one in The Atlantic are more calling out hypocrisy than attempting to take a serious look at the reality of threats from "AI" (which, as you point out is, not really AI).

Climate change won't either.

Far bigger contributor to wildfires than "climate change."

> OpenAI != FTX, just meaning to say calling for regulation isn't an indication of good intentions, despite sounding like it.

I'd argue that any business advocating for regulation is largely motivated by its own pursuit of regulatory capture.

You like your government trying to tell a private company what's true and untrue?

It's just different order of operations on coalition building. Other systems divide into a majority and opposition at some point. In the US it just happens earlier, but there is the same diversity of opinions within those groups.

No one ever claimed it did.

Usually has to do w/ money. FTC eyeing new regulations I'm guessing. Doubt the "big three" will mind that much.

This is why big companies love regulation, and why regulation - even when well-intentioned - can be such a disruptive force to market signals.

Can we just all start operating from the perspective that we're not trying to offend each other?

Do away with all these rules that serve no purpose other than to slot each other into buckets of enlightened and evil.

It's a sign that we have things way too good.

As with any event, multiple factors were involved. I have no doubt tech and process could be at the center, but our self-imposed response to COVID undoubtedly had major impacts.

The market can more than solve this, if it's an issue. We don't need to impose yet another regulatory burden on an industry already nearly completely insulated from competitive forces that drive innovation.

Except the pickle ball court was a conversion of existing recreational facilities (basketball courts?) long requested by employees.

The unnecessary, axe-to-grind editorializing undermines some of the credibility here, imo. There's no way this event hinged on a simple, binary "invest in tech" or "don't invest in tech," and that execs thumbed their nose at the latter.

I don't really care if Southwest tried to negotiate for it, chose not to for some well thought out reason or just dropped the ball. The fact that they have to negotiate for it is broken. The "system" is not set up to allow for agility and innovation. Instead, it acts on protectionist incentives on all sides, none of which directly consider the consumer first.

The fact that a provision was required tells me there was already a provision, negotiated by the AMFA, requiring bag handling to be done a certain way to protect jobs by indirectly limiting innovation and automation.

These sorts of things rarely benefit customers.