Kind of, but they also, to some extent, “work in mysterious ways”, which has becomes evident with very long content (long conversations), for instance.

Even that is a bit misleading since it implies intent by Google.

> Did he or did he not understand when crafting this legislation that Google would never agree to pay to list a site and as a result would de list sites subject to this legislation?

I’m sure he had considered that possibility. But when communicating politically, things tend to get angled a bit.

> And I’m assuming too much by taking him at his word that he didn’t understand this would happen?

Well, it’s politics :p. But I also don’t agree that he couldn’t be surprised even if he understands the issue.

That’s just a polemic remark, as I read it. You’re assuming too much.

> This is a perfect example of politicians legislating on things they clearly don’t understand

Or do understand but don’t agree with you on, is also possible. It can sometimes be easy to confuse those two.

Well, it’s a gadget news sub, so…

> AI is not computationally demanding to run

ChatGPT kinda is, due to the size of the neural network. But it’s all relative, of course.

> Slime molds can also solve advanced mazes. I would posit this is intelligent behavior

Fairly simple algorithms can as well, but we wouldn’t call them intelligent.

Right. Thanks :)

> The link between teen girls’ mental health and social media usage is not just correlational, argues an NYU-Stern professor: There is now solid evidence that it is causal. The argument coincides with the European Union banning TikTok from official devices

How are those things related at all? I doubt the E.U. employs many teenage girls.

You want regulation against a voluntary feature? Why?

No one is stopping web sites from making click bait headlines, either :)

I am not defending anyone. I am suggesting that you speculate without evidence. While that’s everyone right, of course, it’s important to separate speculation from facts.

It requires ID verification.

Multiple layers of security is completely standard, and necessary in practice as demonstrated many times.

> BTW, Apple’s “blast door” was bypassed within a year of introduction.

Not really, if you’re referring to “forcedentry” i.e. the Pegasus zero-click exploit. That exploited a part of the flow that was, at the time, outside BlastDoor (and is now inside).

Maybe you got downvoted for speculation without evidence?

> Or, just spitballing here, they could have designed the kernel so that it doesn’t take root level commands from anything in the application layer…

Sure, but exploits happen from time to time.

> It’s a bit of a mystery.

But

> The reason why iodine was used, is that molecules that contain iodine are highly reactive and often powerful antioxidants,

So, it’s not a mystery? Or just not a mystery why it was originally used, but rather how it was retained?

Although, recent Apple products don’t actually use SSDs, for instance. They use raw flash storage. They also use LPDDR ram which has to be soldered or otherwise packaged to work.

A lot on this forum is just guessing (or at least various degrees of speculation). But this is ignored when people agree with it (e.g. allegations are truths, if you agree with them).

It’s copyright. As in, the right to (control) copies.

Yeah, more so when you’re from some countries.

For the average tourist, I wouldn’t think the chance would be worth mentioning?

For me it’s… we’ll certainly not too, but much higher. I’m not American, so my perspective may be different… I don’t care for their government, of course, but I also don’t plan on visiting them.