That would probably make it very difficult to maintain and develop if there's even a small number of such employees, and I suspect Anthropic, who pays large sums of money for what they perceive as the best talent wherever they can find it, has quite a few.

Especially if those people aren't presently very bright, and are already mad at you for not helping them achieve their unrelated authoritarian goals.

I do not think this is somehow a 3D chess move by Anthropic. They are not masterminds, even if they'd really like to be. People who actually interact with their products know that Fable and Mythos are incremental improvements, not doomsday devices. I think this is a punitive move by an administration that loves being punitive, which they have unknowingly bolstered with their own dumb rhetoric.

"We must blast forwards into making this dangerous thing because if we don't, someone else surely will," is a coward's argument.

If you believe it is dangerous, you should be dedicating yourself to STOPPING others from making it, not making it first! There's a reason disarmament has been so important in nuclear politics! It's not because people think nukes are a great idea!

In fact, that kind of thinking is exactly what keeps nukes dangerous!

If they themselves buy what they're selling, they should shut the whole thing down. Fortunately, I don't think they do, and neither do I, yet.

macOS is far and away the worst thing about it. It's never exactly been a customizable or flexible OS, but Tahoe is also loaded with bugs, has tons of unconfigurable settings (or buries useful things in "accessibility" layers), and is still missing basic features (still no NTFS write support out of the box? really?) for anybody who is not an entry-level user.

But that said, for about $500, I truly don't think anything better exists. One of the best bang-for-buck new electronics I've ever bought.

The problem is that they don't offer a way for you to say "no, thank you, I'll write my own emails", because they are dumping so much money into this thing and if people don't want to use it they can't justify feeding the token machine.

You can turn a lot of this stuff off by having a Google Cloud account and using their "business-class" product, which gives you the power to turn off these features (most of them, anyway) for your "employees". I'm already doing that because I use Google for a bunch of stuff, but if I wasn't, I might switch away from Gmail as well.

I think insinuating that OP is engaging in empty platitudes because they expressed a hopeful philosophical position rather than a cynical one is reading their work in bad faith.

And even despite enjoying their service, if Google Drive produced a Windows integration that actually worked well, I'd leave for it in a minute.

I'd never use OneDrive, but that's more out of spite at Microsoft shoving it at me than because it is bad in any way I know of clearly.

I do think that this bill is clearly structured to disincentivize EV purchases at a time when transitioning to EVs is an extremely good ideas for both the public and the climate.

There are a ton of other ways to go about this that would be less punitive: A one-time fee at purchase. A tax on public charging. A tax on charger purchase for home use, or on electricity at homes which have chargers installed.

I think the goal here is to get people not to buy EVs.

Also - and maybe this is a shortcoming of the reporting in the article, not the legislation - I have questions. How is this going to be collected? Is the IRS going to ask if you own an EV and then assess a tax? Are states going to do it? Who's going to pay for the process of figuring out who owns which EVs and how much to tax them? Is there a grandfather period for existing EVs or are we taxing all EVs going forward? Are we taxing them retroactively, too?

(By the way, the "Albert Gore" quoted in the article, despite their similar names and political interests, appears to be no relation to the former Vice President of the United States. That's a fun coincidence.)

The point is capital accumulation either for accumulation's sake, or to ensure survival of the few at the expense of the many. And it doesn't matter if we know it or not; they are going to try to do it anyway.

But that won't please The Market.