AI is the latest gimmick to avoid paying people a fair share of the profits. Hoarding profits is the only way anyone can afford to make $100 million before age 30 or be a billionaire by age 40. There is no other way to do it.

Pre-1860s: Have slaves do the work, to avoid paying fair wages

1860s-1920s: Have Chinese and low-wage immigrants do the work, to avoid paying fair wages

1930s: Plenty of unemployed, so no need to pay fair wages

1940s: War

1945-1960s: Lets try paying fair wages

1970s-early 2020s: That sucked! Offshore to Asia and Latin America and hire low wage foreigners, to avoid paying fair wages.

mid-2020s: Replace the humans with AI, to avoid paying fair wages

There's no way possible an AI can hack anyone unless the people running it intended for that to occur or were negligent. Anyone with questions about that should install a copy of LM Studio or Ollama on their PC, download a model, and see how easy it is for the AI to hack someone. It's impossible. Only human intervention can make it possible.

These stories seem like propaganda intended to get the US government to block usage of open weight models, since they pose an existential threat to the marketshare of expensive closed AI services these companies offer. Open weight models exist in all sizes, from very rudimentary small models to massive near-frontier quality models, and anyone with the tech know-how and a computer able to run them can do so without paying the AI companies or involving the AI companies in any way. It's like Linux for AI.

It comparable to if Microsoft declared Linux a hacker OS that hackers can use to take down networks. Fear, uncertainty and doubt are the first resort, not last resort, of big companies who know they can't possibly compete with a better alternative.

It's an absurd reply obviously written by someone who's never written a single Android application. Probably a secretary who got Claude to write it up for her while she plans Hawaiian shirt Friday. They make it sound as if they have a thorough process of some kind, but the process is almost certainly going to be a few people signing off that it comes from either Google or Apple.

I don't actually believe Linux desktop user marketshare is what's being recorded in their metrics. It's more likely local AI, possibly home users using Linux computers that run local AI, but it's web scrapes not what's typically defined as home user activity. There's no real way to measure the desktop Linux market because there isn't a centralized licensing tracker except for the small percentage using paid options from Redhat, SuSE, or Canonical.

I don't think it's critical to knowing of Linux is more relevant than it was 10 years ago. It certainly is, and we know anecdotally that many more people are using it outside of servers and a small number of corporate workstations. The rise of local AI and Steam OS (which has a Linux desktop mode) is causing most of it

Probably true, although Ballmer didn't screw it up and Nadella did screw it up for one simple reason. He's a 1 Cloud Pony. He came from the cloud and that's all he really knows, and his narrow Senior VP perspective helped him extract earnings from cloud but nothing else at Microsoft.

All of the big tech social media began using AI for moderation by around 2020. It was always advertised as stopping spam and "inauthenticity" but was abused from the beginning as a no-appeal means of silencing those the staff disagreed with. There are undercover videos from years ago where the people who used to run Twitter talked about it and it also showed up in the source code they put on the web after Musk took over. They had undesirable topics that flagged people to be shadowbanned. The general idea was that if whatever you talked about might offend the Senior VP in the corporate lunchroom then you were eventually flagged and made invisible.

Now it's less obvious because they use ghost banning where your tweets and replies seem to show up, and even get a handful of views from your existing followers, but you're 100% invisible to the rest of the world. "We put a label on your account" appears in your messages a short while after the ghost ban begins at X. If you reply a lot, it seems guaranteed. Many people have no idea they're invisible to the world, although when you never get a reply or a like, you're not as inclined to keep using the platform, so the result ends up being the same as if they did find out.

I think they do it now because they've downsized and don't have many real people working there. The other motivation may be they want to systematically keep the vocal little people from drowning out the commercial accounts who matter to them. Everyone else is there to consume content and view ads.

Earnings are way down from the peak years because the corporate social media enshittifiction drove the majority of the user base to video stream chats like Rumble, Discord, Twitch and youtube chats. Youtube doesn't seem nearly as inclined to screw with that given the competition. It's one of the small number of cash cows that pay for everyone else working on neat R&D projects that get cancelled without ever earning a dime.

The bank's IT exec probably read an article or a blog post written by some Google guy spreading FUD. Google decided the non-Google versions of Android needed to die a few years ago when they hired an engineer in from Motorola (Lenovo). Getting rid of these third party high-security OSs has always been a priority among those in charge in mainland china.

The common issue is larger companies are staffed almost exclusively by mid-wit trendies who don't really know much about anything they manage on a detailed level. The better people learn quickly they need to go to a smaller companies or start their own or maybe go become a Park Ranger. This applies to Google just as much to banks with stupid names that aren't real words. When the founders leave, that's usually the last flight out of a formerly good company before the bureaucrats take power.

The Xbox is a dead platform and PS is right behind it. Look at active player counts for the info on who matters. It's not Microsoft, EA or the others. It's indie studios and free to play studios on the PC and Steam. Until those guys decide they need to comply, none of these laws are going to matter. Any country telling some indie dev somewhere else that they need to set up software to verify ID cards is going to be ignored. Then, the people who want to play those games are going to ignore them too. If you walk around in any major city in Australia today, you see people ignore the law routinely. This is just one more law they will ignore.

If they're tracking web use by PCs they know are not servers, then it's likely due to a combination of local AI computer web scraping and people using SteamOS devices, which are running Linux. Prosumer local AI users often learn Linux if they don't already know how to use it, because the software runs more efficiently on it. Anyone with a Steamdeck or Linux distro like Bazzite copying it on the desktop can exit to desktop mode and use it like a normal PC.

He's just a kid, who took a wrong turn, and is from a good family. He's obviously going to turn his life around. In 10 years, my best guess is the guy's likely to become a surgeon.

These kinds of laws will not succeed. People will choose to ignore them, like they ignore other laws, like they litter, jaywalk, drive 10 over the limit, run stop signs, etc. It will succeed in driving up prices on products from those companies who choose to comply, because they will be forced to hire in a lot more lawyers and compliance staff. These laws create lots of full time jobs in tech companies that few realize even exist. They have meetings every week, attend conferences, constantly send letters back and forth to each other. Then people wonder why their Gamepass fees went up $10 (its not actually the games)

This moment in history is a lot like when power tools were first invented. The bad news is corporate leaders seem to view AI as a means to downsize people. The good news is that AI lets many people who formerly lacked the ability to do anything on their own to move on the "I wish I could do ____. but _____" ideas in their head. It could be anything. You can run a competent local AI model in LM Studio with a $1000 gaming PC or you can pay $20 a month to run a frontier-quality open weights model without the usage limits of the big names. The free AIs can help you get started on doing that. Big companies are using AI for a lot of stupid crap that they try to make sound very profound. They assume customer service and quality assurance are no longer "a thing". This era reminds me of the 1970s when Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had their opening. Sometimes the big guys get sloppy. We're at that point right now. Enshittification is everywhere.

The headline seems a little misleading about the real point of the article where it explains the best way to avoid having to pay anyone like Github in the future is using a p2p equivalent. I agree that having a backup somewhere else is the key to avoiding all kinds of problems when companies decide to raise prices, enshittify, or otherwise ruin the service. Companies have been driven to bankruptcy by cloud services becoming unavailable and they had no backup.

Whether it's development, using AI, office suites, file storage or anything else, you should always have a backup and not rely on another company to continue working or existing as a company. The same social media moderation hall monitor karens who make your article or video critical of commercial cloud AI executives disappear go to all the same conferences as the ones employed at cloud services companies. Most of these people live within 50 miles of each other and are in the same San Francisco Bay Area social circles.

X loses money so no margins there. Twitter has never made a profit in its history that I've ever heard of. Facebook's on the way out. 20 years ago it was college age users. 10 years ago it was people over 50. Now it's a lot of commercial accounts posting as they do on other basically dying or dead platforms. The only sign of life is streaming video and chats related to streaming video. YouTube has been losing users and content creators to both Rumble and Twitch. The right 1/3 of America is on Rumble while Twitch took the gamers. Youtube still has business but they basically gave away enough business to make those 2 relevant.

Alphabet's dependent on Youtube, cloud services, web search, and related ads to pay for the unprofitable parts of the business, which appears to be where the bulk of their employees work, rather than at the earnings-generators. If they screw up youtube, then they will have to lay a lot of the people in the fun and interesting jobs off, along with the many layers of bureaucracy and non-coders working in jobs that nobody's quite sure what they do there. They can't really afford to screw up youtube any more than they have. It can't merely do well. It has to do great to pay all of their bills. Very similar to the action-hero movies at the movie studio paying for all the unprofitable ones that most people work on

AAA gaming is full of execs who have not grasped how their industry has already begun imploding. The survivors in the all digital potato PC world will be the indie devs and Steam since Steam sells their games. The indie game devs write their games to run on anything. The other survivor will be the free to play studios who have already won every market they've entered. If they don't own a gaming market yet its because they haven't bothered winning it. Look at active player counts. Franchises like Battlefield and Call of Duty are way down the charts from the free to play shooter games.

While the headline doesn't discuss it, the article begins with "Meta has opened Pandora’s box with its AI-infused smart sunglasses. The pricy accessory has sparked a heated debate over privacy, with unsavory individuals abusing the eyewear’s easily-missed cameras to harass unsuspecting strangers in public — garnering the specs the distinctly unflattering nickname of “pervert glasses.”"

They've not had a lot of success in the 2020s except for sports games they obviously pay a lot of money in licensing fees for.

They can vote out the city and county leaders then change the zoning to warehouses only.

Don't forget the most important part. Anticipate the user's needs or wants or else ask them what they are likely to be, then make sure they're addressed. Making the most popular idea inside the company isn't what ever works. Its what the users want or will want that works. This is what the tech industry mostly gets wrong, especially among the most famous companies and leaders. Unless your name is Jensen or a few others, if you're a tech CEO, then you're almost certainly clueless about what the customers want and need to go ask them. The long list of mediocre and obscure games that won at The Game Awards, and active player data, confirms this to be true in gaming.

You might check out coreboot and PCs that support it https://www.coreboot.org/end_users.html