Well people who are evangelically praising AI for writing code seem to be converging on established, well-known software practices for "making the AI work better" so seems like AI is great at making people rediscover the practices they didn't feel like putting effort into before AI.
Tax is not only that, it's a way of incentivizing growth in the "correct" areas (areas that build long-term value), and correcting inevitable distortions in the market. One of the problems with money is that it's both extremely important for some people (on the edge of poverty) and a complete plaything for others (investor class).
No, I read that they know they have the power so they don't care, and I'm not powerful enough to not. It's like listening to your boss's boss talking about his heli-skiing adventures.
Both the quotes of this, otherwise empty, article are reasonable and do not make him a Kremlin mouthpiece.
Stating that the west, and the US, has actively used Ukraine as a puppet in the geopolitical game is a fact.
It's also a fact that US troops and NATO forces have increasingly surrounded Russia since the 90s.
Mind you, I think that the NATO argument is bogus.
What happened in Ukraine was not a matter of Russian security, but Putin's own ambitions and paranoia against democratic waves in Belarus and Kazakhstan.
Unless you're going to demonstrate that handing over a golden plaque implies handing over privacy data to government agencies, I'm going to prefer the former over the latter.
Apple has already been outed as one of the participating companies in PRISM. [1] So that privacy boat has long since sailed. The public legal wrangling is likely just a mutually beneficial facade. PRISM is almost certainly illegal, but nobody can legally challenge it because the data provided from it is never directly used. Law enforcement engage in parallel construction [2] where they obtain the same evidence in a different way. So nobody can prove they were harmed by PRISM, and thus all challenges against it get tossed for lack of standing. It's very dumb.
But in any case the legal battles work as nice PR for Apple (see how much we care about privacy) and also as a great scenario for the government because any battles they win are domains where they can now legally use information directly to the courts and sidestep the parallel construction. That also takes the burden off of Apple PR in giving that information up because it can be framed as the courts and government forcing them, rather than them collaborating in mass data collection.
reply