Of course around the same time my older brother, and all our friends were doing the same. So it was just natural to spend less time outside or hanging out with friends in person

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyndryl

> Officially formed in late 2021, Kyndryl was created from the spin-off of IBM's infrastructure services

> Kyndryl operated in 63 countries in November 2021

- strawberry sundaes instead of glasses of water on the dinner table

- exaggerated expressions of surprise

- the fighter cockpit doesn't have a canopy

- the las vegas cocktail party watching the nuke just down the road

Maybe they're not AI, but they've got some weird details that made me decide in my own mind that they ARE AI

hmm.. Wheel of Time? never got into those books personally

edit: a source (I assume lawyers.com is reputable..) https://legal-info.lawyers.com/labor-employment-law/wage-and...

They say they're worried when the building stops. Even more people will be out of jobs. And when the nation ages all they built will be used and maintained by fewer people

I've never been to china so it's interesting perspective from people with family there and go back 2-3 times a year

just let me use the thing

...why?

> State officials say they embed this technology on the exchanges to measure marketing campaigns and to advertise to people who visit their sites

What an absurdist reality we live in

> Tara Lee, a spokesperson for the Washington state exchange, said the tracker on the site was used for advertising campaigns, adding that email, phone and country identifiers were shared with TikTok.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2026-healthcare-advertisi...

Personally, I feel local government should not be engaging these services in this way. I don't feel that it's a wise use and that our government employees should be more protective of the public who use their services.

I'm not sure why. It just doesn't feel very Apple-like

Later the same question was put to the government, and they admitted the same: under the government's theory a warrant would not be needed.

One justice asked petitioner that because 'If you don't want the government to have your location history, you just flip that off. You dont have to have that feature on your phone. so whats the issue?'

They continue to talk about the Terms of Service stating that Google will comply with legitimate government requests. And both the petitioner and justices seem to agree that ANY data would be then up for grabs by the government (without a warrant) if it is stored in the cloud (including email, docs, photos, calendar, business records, etc). Sotomayor points out that the government would need NO warrant to access these records.

The google feature doesn't exist anymore. But in the amicus brief some 30 providers still have features in similar pattern of record storage. 'Google can track you down to 3 feet'. Google had to search "500 million" accounts for the search in question.

Justice Jackson asks why they aren't looking at the case as a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'? The petitioner agrees, and points out that the data is protected by a password. So the data is NOT public.

"Data on the network is property." - how we get laws against stealing data/trespassing data

Probable Cause was an interesting argument. about 90 minutes in. It went by too quickly. The justice seems to say that google's servers are one 'place'. The justice also sees the output of 3 people despite google 'searching' 19 people as the only people who matter.

Responder is leaning heavy into the 'consent' for google to store location history. Is it possible to turn location history off on modern android phones? Responder also argues that because you're in public AT SOME POINT, then your location data is no different than a cctv data pointing at the street. Then a justice interrupts to make the responder say that YES the government CAN perform these searches on anyone it wants any time it wants without a warrant. For example people who seek abortion, or were at a political event. And the responder agrees!

Responder says the email, photos, and docs still need a warrant because they're like your thoughts or mail, where location is different because people are 'constantly advertising' their location to google.

To me, the responder is arguing two things:

1. That whatever you do in public is always available without a warrant

2. Your location history stored in google (or others) are generated in public and are therefore don't require a warrant.

Responder says location records are records google creates on your phone. Justice asks why no one of the 500M people who were searched have complained? (idk, maybe because we have no way of knowing we were searched?)

https://ctmirror.org/2024/01/28/ct-budget-fiscal-guardrails-...

ai summary: "According to that piece, K-12 education has been losing $407 million each year since 2017 due to inflation, even as Gov. Lamont called current funding levels the "largest ever commitment." The author also noted that $2.4 billion in urgent legislative funding requests were denied in one spring session alone, with needs for fully funding education among the shortfalls."

at my workplace the phrase in status/report-out meetings "I built" now means "I asked claude to build"

All of a sudden managers, architects (who haven't written code in a decade), and directors are all building tools

so now we're debugging the tools "they built" and why our product isn't working with them.

Serious question, what jobs do datacenters create?

Are there jobs for local residents?

But, can I offer a quandary? Some companies won't care if it's wrong.

If some executive decides to buy into AI profiling like this, and make customer decisions based on it, then how would the customer ever know:

1. why they are being treated differently

2. know how or why to correct it

I don't know if it's scarier being RIGHT or WRONG