They will not ban it on Servers or for Corporate use

That’s the thing, the law doesn’t differentiate.

It sucks and is stupid but the alternative is banning Linux.

Good. Have it banned in the one state that probably relies on it the absolute most. Silicon Valley would start to implode and the law would be changed very quickly.

/whoosh

Yes, this is perfect!

Irrelevant to my point

The idea that one of these is vastly and objectively superior to all others is just pseudo-religious nonsense.

You can get a job and make a living in just about any country. But the quality of life differences and how comfortable of a living you can make are gonna be vastly different.

the majority of influencer videos about linux during that period praised only CachyOS

Proof? Because the majority of ones I saw recommended Mint consistently.

and I bet most of them reverted back to windows

So no proof, just personal biases then.

In English language installs, Linux went up from 7% to 8%. The dip is due to an influx of Chinese users. Happens every year during Lunar New Year.

No it didn’t. Most new Linux users are still going with distros like Mint or Bazzite.

You had me at “no Node.js”

A mathematician in the 70s said, “hey what if this is how brains work?”

If you really want to be pedantic, the modern concept of neural networks was invented decades prior.

But in either case, ANN do follow the basic concept of how neurons work. That’s not even up for debate. Obviously biological neurons have way more going on, and there’s even evidence for “warm” quantum processing happening within each neuron in the microtubules. But the feed-forward signal mechanism is real, and ANNs are based on that concept.

Except the Neural Net model doesn’t actually reproduce everything real, living neurons do.

No idea what you’re saying here. But if I had to guess, you’re saying that “real brains, not artificial ones, create novel outputs”. And if that is what you meant, then congrats, you said nothing of value. The discussion was never about biological vs artificial neural network quality.

That’s not what an LLM is. That’s part of how it works, but it’s not the whole process.

Unlike LLM which is just fancy autocomplete.

You might keep hearing people say this, but that doesn’t make it true (and it isn’t true).

LLMs are extensions of the techniques developed for autocomplete in phones. There’s a direct lineage

That’s not true.

The quotes are because “AI” doesn’t exist. There are many programs and algorithms being used in a variety of way. But none of them are “intelligent”.

And this is where you show your ignorance. You’re using the colloquial definition for intelligence and applying incorrectly.

By definition, a worm has intelligence. The academic, or biological, definition of intelligence is the ability to make decisions based on a set of available information. It doesn’t mean that something is “smart”, which is how you’re using it.

“Artificial Intelligence” is a specific definition we typically apply to an algorithm that’s been modelled after the real world structure and behaviour of neurons and how they process signals. We take large amounts of data to train it and it “learns” and “remembers” those specific things. Then when we ask it to process new data it can make an “intelligent” decision on what comes next. That’s how you use the word correctly.

Your ignorance didn’t make you right.

Does it run on something that’s modelled on a neural net? Then it’s AI by definition.

I think you’re confusing AI with “AGI”.

Says the asshole throwing out accusations of csam because they don’t like being contradicted.

Don’t like being wrong, eh?

The legal term is: unauthorized access to a computer system.

No, the legal definition is this:

In a legal context, hacking is a term for utilizing an unconventional or illicit means to gain unauthorized access to a digital device, computer system, or network.

Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/hacking

So this wasn’t illicit, because the FBI publicly published the data. So the argument has to be made with “unconventional”. This is what I disagree on.

Think about it in any other way? So I’m just walking down the street… I see a house… I go open a door… I open the fridge. Make myself a sandwich. Then go to a bedroom that’s not mine. Put on some underwear that isn’t mine and leave some stains on the sheets…

That’s illegal. There’s a law for that. There are also laws that protect digital assets in a similar way, and they fall under Cybercrime.

Why don’t you just go rape somebody? And clearly you have authorization to access that vagina or that butthole or mouth or however your fetish desires???

Calm down there, Epstein.

Just tell me you’ve been on Epstein’s Island… Jfc? Wtf is wrong with you, CeeBee_Eh?

You suck at rage baiting. I’m advocating for exposing more of the emails and not letting people refer to it as “hacking”, and you’re so enraged by someone disagreeing with you that you literally call that person “Epstein”. I know mental health care isn’t much of a thing in the US, but please find some help. For all our sakes.

It was there, doesn’t mean it was for you.

Look, I’m not arguing about whether this is illegal or not. I’m arguing about the literal definition of the term “hacking”.

It’s just like walking into a strangers house without permission where the door is wide open is technically illegal, but it can’t qualify as “breaking and entering”.