Isn't the same true for every service and technology we start to rely on?

Remove GPS and people will have to figure out how to read maps again.

Remove search engines and people will have to figure out how domains work.

Remove Wikipedia and we have to go back to the library to check encyclopedias.

Some of them already dumped asbestos on highways, which to me is beyond what any reasonable person would do.

We in NL need to be more concerned about domestic terrorism than the Russians at the moment. Though I'm sure Russian money and bots are involved in some way.

At one point during Covid, I tried (not very hard at all) to float a conspiracy that the vaccine was in fact not the poison, but the antidote. That Covid was deliberately designed by governments to filter the 'independent thinkers' (who won't take the vaccine) from the sheep (those who do take the vaccine). So by not taking the vaccine, you were giving the governments what they wanted.

This was because the conspiracy that governments were killing the loyal sheep with the vaccine, therefore only leaving the 'independent thinkers' behind, made absolutely no sense at all to me.

Based on... What exactly? The Dutch rail network is already considered the busiest network in Europe. So I'm really interested what knowledge you bring that says that it could be busier if many experts say that the busiest trajectories (look at Amsterdam - Schiphol and Amsterdam - Utrecht, for example) are at max capacity already.

Probably. But I like reading a lot of articles I'm not the target audience for, because I like learning things. Writing it like this excludes a ton of people who might not already be insiders to become insiders.

Maybe that's a choice, a way to keep knowledge away from outsiders, to feel better about knowing that people who read your article are cool like you, and that's fine. But if the goal is to educate and reach a broader audience, it isn't effective.

It might be difficult to believe, but some people enjoy running companies just as much as others enjoy traveling the world. Different people have different interests and goals in life. Neither is wrong.

Also, we can't just have people who retire as soon as they have enough money to travel around the world for the rest of their lives, we would only have inexperienced people in many important positions. 3 million is probably enough for that, if you don't demand too much luxury, and that's close to 1% of US families.

The need of the rich, you mean. In these kinds of situations it's never about the many, if it was about them different choices would be made.

IMHO this is a difficult question to answer. Part of the power of paid models comes from the software supporting it. With local models, you have tons of workflows that can severely influence the quality of the result.

In my personal experience, the SOTA models are way more consistent and can handle more complex questions. Part of that is (probably) because I don't let my local model access the internet, while paid models do use the internet to look at docs etc.

For many years we've been aware that edited models on magazine covers, Instagram and in ads are negatively impacting the well-being of (young) people, but we've never done anything about that. I consider this regulation incredibly hypocritical and full on populist because 'AI BAD!' and nothing else.

This doesn't mean I agree with active scanning of things like iCloud, effectively making everyone a suspect, but counter to what people here seem to think it really might help prevent CSA.

There's a much bigger group of people building games with Unity than the number of people building complicated engines like Unity. Same for [insert Javascript framework here].