A BIG chunk of these are captured users working at Big Corp™.

I work at a company of 100k+ employees. The enterprise-managed Window machines we're issued are unbelievably bad. But I'm 100% sure if Microsoft pulled a Darth Vader "I'm altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further" and 10x'd the price, nothing would change. Maybe at 100x (or the point of actual unaffordability).

Also bonus points for the mascot :)

> True, communication could be better.

Nitpick, but bit of a contradiction.

> I could see finance looking at it from a cost perspective if it was API costs, but sharing it with the rest of the users feels like a different measurement...

It is indeed surreal. I am not bullish about this company's technological capabilities going forward tbh.

Must be nice. At Sony we use Copilot (as an MS enterprise customer) and restrictions to token usage circa June have resulted in a hunger games of who-can-use-them-all-first, with the pool usually drying up by the 10th day of each month.

As for usage breakdown: we got a manually-published table most days just showing per-user token usage, until eventually we were told even that was somehow too difficult to provide.

Between that and learning how much the whole of Sony Corporate Group spends on Copilot (spoiler: it's hilariously little), I've sort of run out of disbelief.

At some point I think these sorts of analogies break down, as the setup becomes too foreign to what we're more concretely used to.

In this case: there is no pen or paper which can store what you write on a replicated set of servers across the world, with an accompanying ToS telling you how that will be treated/used.

Although I have little sympathy for this women (both her intent and stupidity), I do agree this is a dangerous thing.

The wording here seems problematic. Why is law enforcement entitled to this degree of access to public surveillance as their "property"? That word strongly implies it is theirs to do with as they wish - I don't see how that would be a desirable state of affairs.

Yes you can - if the citizenry says no and mobilises/votes to that end, the cameras can be physically removed, whether in a city/state/nationally.

This isn't an instance of "the cat's out the bag, it can't be opt back in" - accepting that is a form of defeatism IMO.

Defos swiping this analogy for future use

Unless you're suggesting the language design should also be vibed together?

And it would be one thing if you were doing this in a thread discussing geopolitics, but this one is about satellite evidence showing the total destruction of a city. And your response is to boost the state that caused this?

You already said this in your parent comment?

> Your claim that it’s just a demographic shift is like the argument for the founding of the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-referential_humor

If these are the only party choices an electorate has, it seems to me they have bigger problems. And so option C, the people don't vote, hence giving neither party a mandate to do what they want?

I really struggle to see how an example this obtuse has any analogy to reality.

The reason for Japan's (brief) attempt at immigration is they recognised their demographic decline as an actual existential risk. They've chickened out because it proved sufficiently politically unpopular - this is not the same thing. Good luck to them dealing with their demographics in some other as-yet-unknown way.

Yes it's clear you've been drinking the koolaid. And no, people have migrated around for thousands of years, that's simply not grounded in reality. How do you think humans got from Africa to the rest of the planet? Or does that not count as migration because it's somehow too far in the past?

I don't know how else to refer to a conspiracy theory that's primarily driven by fears/hatred of others based not on their merits and values but their ethnicity/race. If you have another preferred term that accurately depicts this I'd be happy to use it instead.

In any case, there is no country in Europe in which anti-immigration parties have an absolute majority (> 50%), let alone an "overwhelming" one [0]. So to answer your question: yes, democratic decision making is important to me, especially such that it actually reflects the will of the electorate and not some wish a minority within it has.

[0] https://popu-list.org/