Again: yes, of course. But mass media wasn't enough. See also the other comment about religion. That wasn't enough to bring it down, either. Democracy was still viable -- still the best way forward -- despite the best efforts of preachers, popes, and publishers.
But it can't survive social media, which has turned us into an archipelago of competing cults.
With that description you could have been using tiktok with a new account or instagram with a non-us account. Twitter is no more or less a cesspool of misinformation that every other algorythmic content addiction generator (aka 'social media' site).
I recently signed up for TikTok. The default feed is entirely pop culture driven. Twitter really is bottom the garbage bin rage bait slop by default. It’s no comparison and no coincidence. It’s exactly what’s driving Elon Musk to do and say the things he does.
Projectors are a cool toy to show off, same for a projector as a monitor however even on lowest brightness and wattage a projector is a space heater with a quiet but still noisy fan.
The image of a $1100 short throw projector cannot even compare to a $600 75" tv from Walmart which would produce less heat and give you a far more true fake "e-ink" experience with real monochrome output.
Killing tasks,disabling background execution, and limiting clock speed are the easiest ways to extend the "battery cycle"
Slow charging your phone, keeping your phone out of extreme heat, and not gaming on Max cpu speed/brightness are the best ways to "extend battery life"
Even airgapped, this kind of first gen device could later evelove to use USB emulation to appear as a system level device and communicate through its host... if it doesn't already have payloads that add that capability.
What you mean is a portable NAS with wifi hosting, a unuversal web interface / PWA.
The reason this is not a wireless SSD (which is a good thing) is that you are using a network and software stack amd not a low level protocol to access the drive.
Fascinating - telemetry measurements are linear over time if you correct for the server editions.
Default deny all firewall would be my advice for any competent user of a smartphone or pc; but laziness and malfunctioning or inoperable software functions dissuade most users from using the most obvious of solutions to the majority of malware, ads, and privacy.
OP is also marginally underestimating the impact this move would have on Google's competitiveness - they are making huge gains prototyping at light speed; this will halt their AI hardware acceleration plans pushing them back into slower software development on ever aging hardware.
It also shows why Nvidia is not afraid of competitors coming out with new desgings that obsolete their hardware: what good are superior designs with no fabs to produce them?
every one of these things that make the deal "good" for OpenAI is a direct result of negative externalities for everyone else: competitors, consumers, and people who wouldn't care otherwise.
The article even says that they don't have an obvious plan for how to use the wafers they bought, and very clearly suggests that this is purely an anticompetitive tactic to force everyone else to eat a price increase that OpenAI doesn't need to face. It's clever though because if any regulatory agency starts asking questions (not that they would do that in the current USA political climate) then OpenAI can just say it's a strategic reserve, we have plans to do something with it, etc. etc. What are you going to do? Take them to court and force them to auction off some % of the stock? Set an industry-wide limit on wafer inventory? Fine them? You'd need to find some evidence that it was done maliciously, and good luck with that.
There are some negative elements of captialism that we might simply have no reasonable regulatory apparatus to deal with. Preventing indivduals and companies from having so much market power in the first place seems to be the only thing that can work consistently.
The US manipulation of mass media playbook has been on repeat since before executive order 1602.
reply