It’s an incredible shame that even the most progressive regulators, like the South African Competition Commission, haven’t pushed the opt-out. SACC had it in their provisional report but dropped it in the final version, presumably under pressure from Google.

Alas while the EC investigates, irreparable damage is being done to publishers whose work is being stolen by Google. What we need is immediate injunctive relief providing an opt-out for publishers from Google’s AI scraping, *without* being penalised in search indexing.

i guess if you want to go old you could just go back to Putnam’s bowling alone

again i am not arguing with you about agriculture. i am also not focussed exclusively on the US. there are many places where renewables are not likely to “flood the grid” any time soon, and indeed in the US big tech is increasing fossil fuel consumption for data centres as we speak

“AI demand *may* accelerate grid upgrades” is an interesting choice to emphasise when AI demand from big tech is, right now, increasing fossil fuel consumption

compared to agriculture? no. but the marginal increase in water use in water-stressed areas matters a lot. it’s not just amounts it’s location

well it’s that and also the water used to generate the vast amount of electricity they use. even the data centres that are air-cooled use tons of water because they use tons of electricity

if you enjoyed it, yes. if you didn’t, it was probably some other bloke

me and my friends would’ve killed Alexa+ with hammers i can tell you that much

It wouldn’t shock me if some of the responders are insinuating a Great Replacement-style conspiracy, whereby “they” are orchestrating the mass transfer of hapless populations to the UK for nefarious purposes.

which is why the current giants are desperately trying to create all kinds of vendor lock-in for their existing customer base. i do wonder if that won’t be as attractive to young adults who aren’t already in their walled garden though?

oh hold up, time to lock in

ah yes, the reverse popbitch

god the idea someone could have watched my PhD defence is terrifying

It is funny to see Epstein’s agents describe the accurate description of him as a paedophile and sex offender as “hacking” of his wiki page. Hacking is when you try to objectively describe someone’s actions I think

His PRs are right. Wikipedia is nearly always top result or high first page. (Now it also feeds the LLMs). If you control the wiki narrative, you’re a long way to controlling broader public perception. It’s not even hard to do, just takes persistence and unethical Wiki editing firms.

didn’t know that the DSA had a private military force, thanks for the info!